So they’re jailing pseudohistorians now.

“Despite the sentencing, Toben has remained free after the judge gave him two weeks to lodge an appeal.”

Do you object to this? What’s your opinion?

It’s a black month for European free speech, following hot on the heels of Jaqui Smith’s “hate the haters” list.

This is a news story, not an opinion piece. Since you ask, however, I disagree with prosecution and jail sentences for Holocaust Denial. My role – and Counterknowledge.com’s – is simply to expose the sorts of lies that Toben and his lot espouse… another link from his website mentions thermo-nuclear weapons in relation to 9/11.

So Toben mentions nukes in relation to 9/11?

Your point is?

He’s a nut ball. It sounds like he went farther than just being a holocaust denier but treaded on the racist/hate line which appears to be illegal in Australia.

“So Toben mentions nukes in relation to 9/11? Your point is?”

According to a conspiracy theory encouraged by Toben, fourth generation nuclear weapons were used to destroy the Twin Towers on 9/11. It’s important to recognise that we are dealing with a nutjob – and a very offensive one – not just a controversial historian.

I too disagree with any laws that criminalize Holocaust denial. People should have a right to be a shamless liar and lunatic.

Whatever claims Mr Toben has made should be allowed evaluation on its own merits. Not by jailing him for saying so. Why is the evidence so dangerous that he cannot tell people about it? Is someone afraid of it? Why?

As for him being a nut job? Maybe? Who can tell, if we cant see what he says? Did he really inisist that nukes were used? Or did he say, as many do, that thermite was used. He wont be the first person to say stupid or false things. WMD anyone? Aluminium tubes? Anthrax?

I have to agree with his right to free expression. We do not have any constitutional rights to free expression in this country, and it is most unfortunate that the likes of Jeremy Jones, former president of the Executive Council of Australian Jewry, has suceeded in supressing Australian freedom of expression.

But I suppose you better shut Mr Toben up, or he might start denying that there were any WMD.

“It’s important to recognise that we are dealing with a nutjob – and a very offensive one – not just a controversial historian.”

I find this level of discussion — constant use of “nutjob”, “nuball” or whatever — quite ennervating. It’s playground stuff. We’ve understood that you don’t approve of the man and that you’ve sound arguments to back up your gut instinct disapproval. So why resort to name-calling? We’re adults and should discourse on that basis.

As to someone’s being offensive, that’s your rightful opinion. Should we be legislating against offense caused? I find many things offensive in everyday life, but as an adult I accept these conditions and deal with them as I find them. Would I prefer it if weren’t offended by certain things? Yes, of course. Would I want to prevent someone’s offending me? Yes, and if I’m in face-to-face situation I’ll discuss the matter with the person concerned. But seeking to prevent someone from causing offense by imposing blanket statutes against free speech is wrong.

Let’s all try to rise above the language of hatred and get to the heart of the matter: adult discussion based on the facts.

You do yourselves a real disservice by resorting to childish, non-adult name-calling.

… and how can we tolerate the fact that denial, however offensive, can be regarded as a crime? Some people won’t accept any truth, however self-evident. We should be talking, not shutting people up.

Discussion in a climate of fear can never be free.

I applaud the decision taken by the court. I can as I do not live there. The problem is Toben is inciting people to the level we have seen in our most recent history when Slavs, Jews, Irish and Black people were murdered as a result of people like him. Anyone remember that well thought out and scientific theory of Eugenics??

Toben has no right to make statements as he has done. He does not present accurate evidence, instead he uses statistical methods to show it could not have happened. Maybe the eyewitness accounts from the advancing soldiers and the survivors of these horrific camps exaggerated a bit. After all it was a huge physical and mental blow. There is no way that they could have exaggerated to the extent of the actual evidence (photographic, eyewitness, survivors and let us not forget the in ordung records kept) actually states the case. At some point in time the senses are overwhelmed and the gross evil that was present causes us to blank what stares us in the face.

I wonder when the holocaust deniers will start on the Serb/Croat murders? Will they deny a famine that killed millions in Ireland while food fled the country? Will they deny the forced sterillisation and euthanasia that Sweden and the US were involved in during our worlds Eugenic period? What about Chinas murder of its own citizens?

No! Toben and his kind have to be stopped here, now at this moment in time. They are contemptible, beneath those of us who hope that we will not repeat the mistakes of history and perpetuate the “right” of people to take away the lives of others.

As a matter of fact, there are people who deny or are apologists in regard to all above-mentioned issues.

For example, I do not like Croat neo-Nazis, whether armed by Hitler or by the West. The idea of sterilizing retarded people does not fill me with horror. The idea of putting the insane in nice mental hospitals does not get me all red in the face.

Three strikes, you are out: I am marked as illiberal, and Mr. Smacx will come and leaflet outside my house, trying to chase me out of the neighborhood, as some American Jews are doing to Santomauro, since they cannot close him down legally.

Re: Pseudohistorian

You are a proponent of free speech – which I commend – yet you react pretty strongly to my use of the word ‘nutjob’, suggesting it is an example of “the langauge of hatred”. Lighten up – Toben is quite plainly bonkers.

I agree, however, with your opinion that the heart of the matter is “an adult discussion based on the facts”. Welcome to Counterknowledge.com

@matteo b

I do not like to be taken out of context. Therefore I will spell it out for you.

The right for anyone or group to incite violence against another is not a legitimate one. The right to take away from others their freedom, dignity and life is not a legitimate one. The right to counter an argument with properly researched facts and to express horror and revulsion at those who persist in claiming these illegitimate rights is called freedom of speech.

I do not condone anyone who speaks from a platform of hatred. I do not condone those who insist their “principles” are correct based on their warped view of the world. I will not insist anyone accept what I say as de-facto truth, I will ask them to inform themselves as I have by looking at both sides and using my rational, well informed mind come to a conclusion that is morally and socially correct.

Your point is?

Hide under the bed, the speech police is at the door.

Hur Hur Hur…..

Lets just say, that on a topic as serious as this the childish approach is not appropriate.

Apologies if my writing style is a bit on the correct side, I just don’t believe that spurious off the cuff remarks are warranted.

If you want to engage me in debate, I would be happy to take you on. But remember, in a battle of wits it is a good idea to come armed.

‘He suggested only 2,007 people could have been killed at the camp.’

I presume that Toben has played a typical denier trick, insofar as he is focussing on just one part of the Auschwitz-Birkenau complex – the Auschwitz I camp which has been preserved as a memorial.

In any case, it comes as no surprise to me (re: Will Heaven’s comments) that yet again someone who is prepared to tell lies about the Holocaust is also prepared to tell lies about 9/11. I’ve seen that quite often on the comments page here, and on other sites with a similar purpose to Counterknowledge.

For what it’s worth, I am unhappy with the idea of Toben going to jail, as this gives him the veneer of persecution. Like Lipstadt, Hilberg and other genuine historians, I believe that lies are best fought with the truth.

I do not need my views of historical events to be approved or condoned. In a free society, at the free marketplace of ideas, I need the freedom to express my irregular, then suspicious, definitely vile, verging on shameful, actually revolting, truly horrifying, hate-filled views. At which point is the thought police going to intervene?

I know that those who require that my opinions be “properly researched”, will be displeased with the quality of my scholarship. Next, without doubt, the speech police will knock at my door.

The only thing that they will tolerate are thoughts. Sure, it does bother them, the fact that “die Gedanken sind frei”. But have patience, they are working on the problem, and the day will soon come when Free World Free Speech Police will be able to scan our mind, to make sure it’s kosher.

P.S. 2000 and seven? Toben is obviously mentally ill, maybe he will be saved from jail on that account.

…first they came for the Holocaust deniers, but I didn’t speak up because…

The jailing of people for being nutters/nutjobs was Soviet, was it not ? To deny the succes and/or inevitability of socialism was to self-condemn. Today, to deny Al Gore’s global warming climatastrophe is to be similarly condemned, and the ever-so-tolerant green/left are muttering about it being a crime.

Free speech is apparently guaranteed by The UN Declaration of Human Rights. Is that wonderful document being diluted on our watch ?

Just to clarify something for you all; he was NOT jailed for what he said! He was jailed because he repeatedly breached a court order. The court order could have been for anything. Breaching a court order is considered a very serious offence in Australia and other jurisdictions because, as the logic goes, if people become prepared to thumb their nose at our justice system then we have no enforcable rights anymore.

The Russians are also legislating against ‘deniers’ to protect a single view of history:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/europe/8058087.stm

The correct response to Toben is ridicule and and invitation to all to go to Germany and Poland as see for themselves the historical evidence. Something Toben has not done. In the meantime, however small this type of disturbed individual is in our society, persecution by courts merely proves to them that the authorities are covering up the truth. Like the hysterical fools following whatever one of the dozens of 9/11 hidden conspiracy theories available they are best told to look for some medication from their doctor.

Ironic and Orwellian that we have the executive and judiciary in modern Australia behaving like police state Nazi’s because they don’t like what they are hearing in this case. The guy can say whatever he wishes as far as this goes. He is not violating anyone’s individual rights specifically and the state yet again here is engaging in crime, period.

Quite. If a writer makes mistaken assertions or deliberately lies,they can be challenged with clear references to actual facts. If he incites people to actsof violence there are laws against this. When the expression of a point of view is criminalised, we are entering the territory of “thoughtcrime” and the idea of free speech becomes meaningless. It is quite conceivable other points of view, currently deemed innoccuous or even praiseworthy, may at some future time be criminalised.

“Al Gore’s global warming climatastrophe…and the ever-so-tolerant green/left are muttering about it being a crime.”

The only crime we have muttered about was not the denial, but the hiding of evidence, along the lines of hiding the danger of tobacco or lead in paint.

It is a pity that people like Toben and Irving are being jailed for voicing their foetid interpretations of the Holocaust. They do so much more damage to their reprehensible cause by being free to express their (mal)interpretations of historical truth than when they are locked up in a prison and limited in their expressions.

Irving, for example, gave a tea party for Bishop Richard Williamson, a truly misguided fool. Had Irving not been free to host the good Bishop the paper I wrote on the Bishop’s silly statements would have had less relevance:

http://www.holocaust-history.org/williamson/williamson.shtml

There is no crime in denying whatever you choose to deny. The crime is to jail the deniar.

There is dam-near water-tight scientific consensus that the world is billions of years old. It is plain-sight denial for the millions of Christian evangelists who strongly believe that it is 6,500 years old. It seems patently ridiculous to make these claims – but then again, is it not offensive? As a secular humanist I take enormous pride in the graceful and tenacious ascent of humanity to the hiehgts we have now reached. I find a particular beauty in the development of my ancestors over thousands of years, millennia. When I am told publicly that none of this happened – that my billion-year old genetic ancestry is a lie, a sham, that all I have ever loved was just the plaything of some celsstial dictator, am I not entitled to be outraged? Are not these ‘evolutionary denialists’, in the face ov overwhelming geological evidence, plainly inciting intolerance to my entire belief system and cherished ancestory? I think that they should be detained and tried for their crimes against my identity.

Oh wait – secular humanists don’t have entrenched influence, financial puppetry and ferocious and tribalistic zeal. Oh well.

So how much notice would anyone take of Toben if he said he believed that the holocaust took place? With people like him it isn’t about truth or falsehood, it’s about getting notice and reputation with people who will contribute money……Toben is a nobody; the one who is scary is Irving because he can make it sound reasonable and right and his spin is difficult to counteract without a lot of time and effort.

Remember the old saying, “Sticks and stones will break my bones but words can never hurt me”?

It needs to be revised to, “Sticks and stones can break my bones but words will now land me in jail.”

Personally, I think 12 million Jews were killed in the holocaust: If Abe Foxmann thinks only 6 million Jews were killed in the holocaust does that make him a holocaust denier?

My conclusion, having worked at the Twin Towers, is that the Thermite that was used in the demolition as a cutting-charge was not sufficient to actually cause the apparent ‘collapse’ whereas it required the sensation of dead silence, unlike normal bottom-up implosive means, such as we saw on Building #7. (’Loaded’ around 1989, upon completrion of the steel frame.)

The use of a thermobaric charge in the basement level 3 would explain the observable phenomena. Additionally, tri-coordinated sonic blasts could have facilitated the process through sub-structural resonant means. Two ’smoking guns’ persist, (justifying Towbin’s belief,) the resultant heat, well over 3,200 degrees for 6-10 weeks, and the total pulverization of all materials within. Generally, the overt efforts on the part of our government to cover-up the true story are sufficient to cause global alarm. Even the OJ case was handled with kid gloves by comparison, (pun intended.)

Sadly enough, hate-groups, like the ADL have concocted this bogus phrase ‘deniers,’ intending to somehow discredit those who do not believe the official numbers. But, to make of this a crime, they had better include those of us who do not believe in the tooth fairy, who have litte regard for the Easter Bunny, and who neglect to recognize that ‘Santa’ is quite literally “totally addicted” to chocolate ‘bickies!’

@Luke: People should thumb their nose at the so-called ‘justice system’ in OZ, simply because it is entirely predicated on a system foisted upon it’s servants by the Queen of England.

You said ‘goodbye’ to ‘freedom’ when you chose NOT to defend the first “Official Constitution of Australia,” on 12.30.1999. –Or don’t you recall your nation’s whimpering response to the Ghost PM? Like, dude, “Not your right to know,” as we Americans see it, is very similar to “Get your ass down on the ground, Comrade, or I will * you.”

Both ‘ideals’ are rooted in the notion that YOU cannot guarantee the government will remain subserviant to YOU, meaning All citizens, individually and collectivly, unless you are unencumbered in challenging every single rule and ordinance they may propose.

“Rule by referendum” is the only option either nation can call on as long as the entire system can be subjugated to Maritime, as opposed to Civil Law.

What is the evidence of mass murder of jews during WWII? Is it true that millions were gassed and cremated, buried, gassed by deisel fumes, shrunken heads, their skins made into lamp shades? What’s the truth here? Why is this man Toben being silenced? What if he’s wrong? So what? What if he’s right? So what? Do we jail people for denying Jesus Christ? Why not?

The Director of the Holocaust Museum at Auschwitz is a Holocaust denier, because he agrees with the changes made to the number of dead Jews claimed on the plaque out front. (4 million was changed to 1.5 million).
He also states that the Russians built the “gas chambers” after the war.

I HEREBY DENY THE HOLY-COST!
EVERYONE I KNOW DENIES IT!
I HEREBY ENDORSE THE PROTOCOLS OF ZION!
WHY?
ONE BIT OF FICTION DESERVES ANOTHER! EH?

History repeats itself – the establishment in the Medieval Ages (the Church) had the Inquisition to suppress free thinking. The ruling elite of the 21st century is no different.

Will Heaven … what if I call YOU a “nut-job?” Would that be OK?

Having followed your “Meet the Team” link at the top of your counterknowledge website, I am completely underwhelmed. What I found was a profusion of young men who by definition must have a rather limited experience of life.

Posting big-mouthed opinions and then trying to make them stick by gathering together as a group, in order to intimidate individual readers, isn’t the way forward my friend.

On first inspection, you seem to be rather too well funded to be a genuine venture. I suspect you represent (because you might otherwise be unemployed journalists) a last gasp effort by the Establishment to hold back the tide of truth and reason.

Your snobbishness about who is, or who is not qualified to study History (in your humble opinion) really stinks. Let me tell you something … academics are not intelligent by definition. All they represent are persons who have been indoctrinated into the system … into orthodoxy. But that is precisely where the problem lies … in adhering to historical orthodoxy.

Other commenters have already pointed to the number of times key statistics associated with this Holohoax have been revised since 1946. Surely those responsible for such seldom-reported changes are the real ‘historical revisionists’ and not people like Toben?

The Tobens of this world exist because Journalism is chock full of fresh-faced urchins who don’t yet have the wisdom to sort the wheat from the chaff, and also because orthodox Historians (the so-called Academics) have FAILED us! In other words, most academic historians are incompetent and/or too fearful of rocking the boat. Under such conditions, the only people likely to uncover the truth about the so-called ‘Holocaust’ will be the Tobens of this world … whether you like it or not.

To chastise this man simply because he has far more guts than you, and is willing to go against the grain, speaks volumes about the true and shoddy character of those who are responsible for this website.

I would suggest you get back to studying Classical Greek before you end up, due to your immaturity, cutting the last tenuous threads that presently allow us to believe we are still living in a democracy. Shame on you.

the holocaust happened a long long time ago. i don’t think that any of us were there, we didn’t witness it, nor did we partake in it, at least not in this incarnation anyhow.

so why then is everyone so opinionated about a subject that none of us saw with our own eyes?

one thing is for sure the predominantly jewish controlled mass media is hell bent on continually foisting a version of the events upon us – ad nauseam – (indeed have you ever seen a holocaust movie that didn’t sweep the oscars, and lets remember that the oscars is completely an in-house situation these days) in the hope that we don’t forget how hard done to they were when now they own and control much of the worlds wealth/media/resources.

Why are there so many hell bent on telling us things happened the way they did and also hell bent on going after the people who open it up to discussion? Why is it a closed subject?

The only reason i can see that anyone would be so focused on persecuting anyone that denies the holocaust is FEAR. Because if it really happened the way it did why worry? truth is truth and it will always out in the end – that is it’s nature.

it doesn’t take a degree in history to know that something smells fishy though.

It is like someone saying to you-
“This is the way it happened, trust us, and under no circumstances investigate for yourself – just take our word for it”

I am a Hollowcast denier . There is plenty of evidence that the Hollowcast (sic) is a fraud . The Red Cross report issued after WW2 did not mentiont his episode . Even Bishop Williamson recenctly stated that only may be a few hundred thousand people died in concentration camps . The number of people whio died in Auschwitz has been revised down on the commerative plaque a few times .This H trick is to extract money under false pretenses from EU states and justify the criminlity and APARTHEID that goes on in Palestine . This case again
illustrates the fact that in Australia today the judiciary works hand in had with ASIO and the laws are in place to protect a certain criminal Midlle Eastern CABAL that controls even the USA . It seems that saying that the emperor has no clothes can land people in jail . That fact that it is not possible to research the Hollowcast indicates that people are forced to believe the official garbage . Legitimate historians that do not follow the political correct line suddenly become ” pseudo historians ” . There are plenty around like “Faurissons ” .What’s the difference between the Kangaroo Court that condemned Galileo Galilei and the Kangaroo court in the Toben case ? What happened to the
what Universal declaration of Human Rights that Australia signed but does not observe ? Australia even sends ASIO agents overseas to harass expatriates that know of a huge judicial scandal kept secret by the criminals in charge .
It is time to wake up about what Australia has become
I am a proud expatriate that denies the HOLLOWCAST !

Sooo, historic review is hate speech. Amazing. Any other examples of historical review being illegal? Civil war? Vietnam? Korean war? Gulf war? So it’s only the jews who need to have their historical “facts” protected by law. Read 1984.

Toben is a modern day Paul Revere who warned of the approaching Britsh army in America.He is correct.He is a martyr.A genuine hero.He should not be ignored because the old testament and the Talmud holy book rate one race as human the rest of us are animals and subject to the desires of the real race.If we are killed it matters little.There is a race who wishes this planet for itself alone and they are happy to kill to get it as in their holy books.

When are you stupid sheeple wake up and do your homework on the Holocost. THE JEW WORLD ORDER. READ – the Balfour Treaty and maybe you will start to understand. What happened to FREE SPEECH. The Jews do not want you to know the truth. When you do find out you will be very angry at all the lies you have been told.

Every serious look at the Holocaust has found that there are people living who were claimed exterminated, there are claimed mass graves are completely non-existent, and the numbers of dead have been significantly exaggerated. Zionists doesn’t want this known because they prefer to be seen as victims instead of thugs, terrorists, land theives, orchard burners, civilian killers, water thieves, people who ignore dozens of dozens of UN resolutions, and generally badly behaved people.

I used to have the highest opinion of Australia.
Like America it is no longer the land of the free.
It has become the land where a ‘thought’ crime ends you up in prison.
I am old enough to remember the old Soviet system at its worst.
Australia, this is the small edge of the wedge.
Knocks on doors in the middle of the night are next.
Ask many Americans today.
Why is he imprisoned?
The suspicion is, that it is not that he wasn’t right, the ‘powers that be’ cannot prove him wrong.
He cannot be proved wrong by debate – so he is imprisoned.
If you have a remotely open mind you will have worked this out for yourselves.
Australia has done some valuable work in correcting the accuracy of holocaust claims.
It was Australians who have proved that one famous camp which supposedly had mass graves in its grounds didn’t even have a fox hole.
Doesn’t that get through your brainwashed minds that something is indeed wrong with the story.
Also give some consideration to the fact that the Russians lost nearly 30 million dead turning back the Nazis. The suffering in Russia was as bad if not worse than anything reported as having happened in the camps.
If we are going to venerate sacrifice and war dead – lets start with them perhaps. Lets get some perspective when we consider WW2.
Let us also remember that up to 5 million Germans died in the days ending WW2 from starvation and disease as the allies blockaded the country. Could it be that many of the ‘holocaust’ victims died as a result of this blockade. There was no food for many, not just jews.
I for one think its about time the facts were fully examined. There are far too many myths being peddled as facts.

The Holocaust Denial problem should be dealt with in a civilized manner, all the expert’s on the issue from all around the world
need to get together, as in Iran, from both sides of the debate, and have an open and honest inquest, all genocide’s from the overthrow of The Czar of Russia, 1st & 2nd world war’s up to and including the genocide of the Palisinians need to be dealt
with. But then again Israel would not like the world to know the truth, because if the goyim really knew what has happened then
you would see some really serious HATE CRIMES………..

we have woken up here in Australia to the fact that we are the 53
or 54th state of America and you know who controls America

So…he’s nutjob. So what? That does not detract one iota from his human right to freely speak his mind on any subject he chooses. Start banning nutjobs from having their say and soon no one will be able to have their say…on any issue.
No.. I dont approve of anyone assuming MY intelligence in this way. You either believe in the principle of free speech, or you dont…you cant get a little pregnant on this issue…and with apologies to those from the professional think tank class and to the fearful – you just dont get to pick and choose who has that right….not now..not ever…even if you outlaw it….its a HUMAN right…not a betowed grace. Grow up and stop acting like paranoid children.

I see a lot of name calling here.

Holohoax or Holocaust. I don’t know.

What I do know is:

When the facts are against you argue the Law.
When the Law is against you argue the facts.
When the Law and the Facts are against you call the other side names.

It does not serve Toben’s critics well to call him names.

The usual attempt at smear and character assassination tries to say all holocaust revisionists are “nazis”, “fascists” or “kkk”. But David Cole, a Jew who is a holocaust revisionist made a documentary on Auschwitz located here http://www.holocaustdenialvideos.com Also Alexnder McClelland, an Australian war veteran of North Africa and Greece who fought the nazis, was a pow and concentration camp inmate, also a holocaust revisionist http://www.aijf.org/book.html Efforts to say that only people with limited intelligence don’t think the holocaust is genuine are thwarted when you realise that Bobby Fischer, the late world chess champion with a genius IQ was a holocaust revisionist.

There was of course one real death camp but zionists and liberals are not so keen on this one being remembered.
I doubt if you will ever have heard of it.
Even the Nazis and SS were shocked at what went on at that butchery. It was not a workcamp but fan extermination camp, real extermination.
Check it out and you will understand why the censorship. The real revisionism.
It throws some light on the breakup of Yugoslavia and the ethnic hatreds.
And of course, NATO bombs its victims.
Jasenovic.

this is sad for Australia, Fredrick Tobin is a historian to be proud of. SHAME AUSTRALIA !
this proves our freedom of speech is controlled by the Zionist mafia
anti-semitism is a desperate defense against the real truth
watch (Jewish) David Cole’s doco on Auschwitz and the holocaust, and you would be questioning the alleged story we are being force fed by the Zionist controlled mass media yourself.

the real truth has nothing to hide, but Zionists sure seem to hate it. they seem hell bent on bringing in martial law, anyway they can. whether it be by inside jobs or by man made swine flu hysteria. Mossad and it’s partners in crime, the CIA, mi6, and most western intelligence agencies are behind the bogus war on terror, with there manufactured terrorism, setting up Muslims and pushing them over the edge with atrocities, until they become freedom fighters. and then they are conveniently called Al-Quaida, Taliban, insurgents

anyone who has studied and researched history knows Zionists and there neo con puppets and useful idiots control the world with terror and money. they are the biggest threat to humanity, bar none.

anti-Zionist Jews have real ethics and morals, and are great people
there is good and bad in every race, color and species

Will Heaven sed: “This is a news story, not an opinion piece.”

Bwahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha! Stop it, stop it. You’re killin’ me.

Sticks and stones will break my bones, but words will never hurt me.
Maybe we should ask why his words hurt the jews so much, they feel a need to punish him. If he is a “nut job” I would only laugh at him if I were a jew. If it was true, I would try to silence him.

just shut up, and tow the line. that’s what they want you to do.

Someone please tell me what’s so important about the freaking jews, and their pseudo holocaust? Get out of my face with that crap. How about the black folks? how many millions were killed, enslaved, abused for centuries? By none other than your jewish traders. And look at what they are doing to the Palestinians. Where is there sense of compassion? Do they really feel threatened? Or is this genocide?

Sorry, but the holocaust is ancient F’ing history. Get outta my face with that crap.

hmm! i just love these tobin bashers. they demand the right to express there view point of mr. tobins view point, but then turn and say he has no right to express his view point, under the false premise that he is formenting hate speech, all the while these toben haters are doing the exact same thing they accuse him of doing. i think they call that hypocrasy. i could be wrong though, so i quess ill just have to wait for the tought police to carry me off to jail for spreading hate speech against the tobin basher’s. if i remember correctly there was another person in history charged with the exact same thing by his deniers. hmm! let me see, i think his name was jesus christ, of course i could be wrong though.

Open Letter To
Mr Simon Wiesenthal –
Nazis Chasing Sixty Years
After The War
From R. D. Polacco de Ménasce
France
6-27-4

My Dear Sir,

I do think that no Jew will ever dare to tell you the truth.

I am probably the only Jew left who can tell it to you.

I have learnt that you are still chasing very old persons who had responsibilities in the Nazi regime. Sixty years after! People who are eighty-five years old! How shameful!

Do you know one ethnicity who did such a thing in the course of the History of Mankind? You are the very symbol of Talmudic hysterical neverending hatred.

This is the more egregious as the Nazi regime gave work, sane economy and balance to a whole country, whereas today, everything (when I mention everything, I mean absolutely all) is both Jewish and entirely rotten.

Jewish Capitalism has collapsed the world into all forms of pollutions. Jewish Marxism has slaughtered 200,000,000 people.

To crown it all, everybody knows that there were not 6,000,000 Jews ( a country the size of Switzerland) in occupied Europe in 1941 (The American Jewish Year book, mentions 3,300,000 Jews and from that date (1941) on, we all fled to the Free Zone or to Spain towards England). And it is only one million Jews whom Hitler wanted to exchange for trucks at the period of the so-called Shoah. Besides we know that Zyklon B cannot gas 1000 or 2000 people at one time (see M.Roubeix, chief executive of the factory of Saint Avold producing cyanide acid) in gas chambers which have strictly never found norms.

I suppose you would rather have a Jewish USA government enshrined in Jewish finance, pinching petrol in Iraq, spreading Jewish one-worldism, Jewish pornography, Jewish press, Jewish puppets in all governments, than the cleanness of the Nazi regime which made a miracle out of the Jewish rot of the Versailles treaty – the negotiators of which were the Warburg brothers, and that of the Weimar Republic.

You are 95 years of age: if you are not insane what will you tell the Lord when you soon appear if front of Him?

I do wonder.

Entirely disgusted,
R. D. Polacco de Ménasce

Free Speech … what about free speech people????

Heared of freedom of speech anyone????

let`s talk about the ukrainians who died by the hand of the jew stalin and Cie…
Josef Stalin (USSR, 1932-39) – 23 million (the purges plus Ukraine’s famine)

what about Mao Tse-Tung (China, 1958-61 and 1966-69, Tibet 1949-50) – 49 to 78 million people

Funny you dont hear a soul talking about it or whining about it…
the jew holocaust is small patatoes compare to these!!

why jail someone for his opinions…live and let live people…
dont jail people for their opinions even if he`s a tad crackpot

you want me to continue , what about the arminians ??
what about the polish people???? i can go on and on…

please stop with this jewish holocaust after 60 years of biching it is time to put it to rest. enough is enough

what about the amerindians ???? 100 millions
what about the kurds????
what about the arminians???

When I hear people say that someone has no right to make statements……………Huh!! This whole concept is so un-’American, so foreign to ideas of free speech etc. that it’s mindboggling other nations don’t see it. No one has to believe what someone says. The person making these statments, isn’t twisting anyones arm to believe them. The State however, IS, insisting that whatever they say be believed, under the threat of punishment. This is the wrong road to go down for humanity. Have we learned nothing? It harps back to how the church, in its days of absolute power in Europe, would threaten scientists and other people if they weren’t quiet about certain things.

Fredrick Toben is a Saint and shoud be treated as such.

Stupid and sick of Jews always crying and mourns over holocaust since 60 years ago and they put and build holocaust museums everywhere around world to memorial for dead jews, Full of bull shit because no evidence about gas chambers , Look and think we have to pity on jews for their suffering loss?, No, Jews send Lord Jesus to condemned, And Jews supposed Emperor Nero to murdered millions of christians in 50 AD and they send more killing cathers, more killing than you think we have to put museum for memorial, No, but don’t forget other Mao Tse-Tung murdered millions in China and Tibet because socialist under communist belong to jews, Soviet police killing thousands of Polish armies by ordered from Jewish Josef Stalin and Jewish Lenin send Bolsheviks to shot royal tsars’s family and kill millions of white russians, don’t forget Jews and rabbis kidnapped kids for their sacrifice and worship for they drink kid’s blood, they like as vampire. they worship god of Jehovah -Yaldaboath the demiurge and his offspring of the chief achon, they are very dangerous and organised crime.

For all holocaust deniers, just simply do the the math. Take the population figures of jews before the holocaust and then take the population figures of jews after the holocaust. it should be 6 million lower, but add back the natural increase based on births during the period. end of story.

What I often find so strange is how the comments often reflect 80%-100% for freedom (from the orders) vs. the policies and arrests of the so-called ‘mainstream’ being carried out. Anyway, there is only one law; the golden rule, do not infringe on another’s life, liberty… All other rules, codes, statues, by-laws .. apply only to those who’ve thought them up! See detaxcanada.com

Here’s the Holo topic again. Just like the cause of the Nam war, 911 and this topic again, much time in research ana analysis is required. Cheap and quick comments are the works of the ignorant and those really not interested in the truth. They just cannot wait to get their 2-liners out there.
As the previous contributor said…just simply do the math..and you will find, from several official sources that between 1938 – 1946 the world population of Jews actually increased. After many years of research myself, my conclusion is that the Holo event is a hoax and it caught on in popularity and as fact during the kangaroo court days at Nuremberg, Germany. They say that to deny this hoax is a crime against a race and people that causes and caused them harm. I say this hoax from the days of Nuremberg and on has insulted many Poles, Urkraines, Russians ans even Germans today. Those that character assassinate are cowards, that have no facts to back up their claim…just like 911 etc.

Regardless of how we feel about what this man said or wrote, we must acknowledge the fact that he has been jailed for what he said or wrote – and for no other reason. It’s a huge step to take, and it’s a sword that cuts both ways. Stop the hyperbole, the insults, the ad hominem attacks, and realize that this man’s right to free expression has been crushed by the state. How far will we walk down this road? Will we kill people for their opinions next? Kill their “sympathizers,” their families? It is not far-fetched: the man has been thrown in a hole, with rapists, murders and theives. When political seasons change, who will be next?

1984 is well on it’s way folks. “Thoughtcrime” is alive and well and as soon as they manage to implant the microchips NO-ONE will escape. Its time to become self sufficent in the essentials, natural non-gmo food and water cos this depression was planned and will only end when the elites grind the middle classes into dust. Hyperinflation is next and all that cash you have saved or invested will become worthless. Its very depressing to see all the sheeple identifying with their opressors and attacking the awakened. God, i’d hate to be suffering from cognitave dissonance.
To those still asleep i would say, yes it’s initially very disturbing and uncomfortable to have the nice warm rug of constructed reality pulled from under you, but now that i know the truth of things everything makes a lot more sense and i’ve actually been walking around with a genuine smile on my face for the past few months and have never felt better. The truth WILL set you free. Free from the prison of the mind we are all crammed into as soon as we start that first day of school.
Incidently the word system was originaly the Roman word for SEWER
We are all brought up in the Educational SEWER
And our ‘Justice’ is metted out to us through the Judical SEWER
The true meaning of the language we use communicate has been kept from the general pop, for fairly obvious reasons.
Anyhoo, on the Holocaust topic Tobin is pretty much on the right track. Several actual residents of the ‘death camps’ came forward during the fifties and sixties to attempt to refute the mainstream position and said they were nothing more than work camps. Allied arial photography of the camps from 43′ through 45′ had no evidence of tall chimneys. And of course census figures refute the offical line also.
My position is that the Zionist elite(note, NOT the jewish people) grossly exagerated the numbers killed for thier own ends and in fact cared little for the actual victims, whatever their number.
Anyone who has not been drinking flouridated water(introduced by the nazis in their work camps to keep the populations docile) or Aspertame laced diet drinks will, with a bit of research and patience, discover the real facts.
Also i would imagine the maintainer of this website is either being well paid to ridicule those who seek real facts or has been happily guzzling down the aforementioned mind suppressents.
Peace

Sorry, but when you deny free speech we are all prisoners.

I think he is probably wrong. I say probably only because I did not see the evidence first hand.

Remember – Science advances by proving wrong what we thought to be right, not by proving it right. We cannot know everything so why can he not have his opinion? – Kinda makes you think of what Adolf would have done, had he won…..

Read Red Cross report about the reasons for all those pictures of starved, there was widespread hunger and even lots of germans were dying from it. Another piece of undeniable evidence is that officially Auschwitz victim figures have been reduced drastically.
We can find water on other planets but we still cannot find evidence of real gas chambers in concentration camps (except for made up one) or the mass graves.
The whole thing was well planned and executed by jews to acquire victim status so that they have free hands to commit any atrocity they want (like 60 years of genocide in Middle East) and prevent people condemning it publicly for fear of being labeled anti-semitic. 6 000 000 died in camps but, surprisingly enough 5 000 000 registered for reparation with German government. On top of that you read every so often that another, presumably dead “camper” surfaced somewhere in the world.
Only way that claim of six million can stand is by this sort of math:
Let me give an example of jewish mathematics, since not everybody here is familiar with the handling of numbers.

Now, lets first make a list of victims of the HC.

There were 10 at Auschwitz, 10 at Dachau, 10 at Buchenwald , 10 at Theresienstadt, 10 at Bergen-Belsen and 10 at various sites.

You can see this is six times the number “10″.

Now let us first add up the six “1″. 1+1+1+1+1+1 = 6

Clear so far?

Ok, now we have the six zeros left. Let us put them behind the 6.

We get: 6.000.000

Actually, this is not so difficult, isn’t it?

And, by the way, I too believe that 9/11 was inside job, that ALL major wars were deliberately started upon lies and financed (both sides) by international bankers ( red shield family features prominently and is also in control of all ten banks who control “Federal” reserve) and that jewish lobby has US by the balls. Those facts can easily be checked through patient research. I am also gagged by Brutish courts because I believe in telling the truth and truth is highly damaging to fraudsters, deceivers and criminals in general.
Vicious persecution of those who have opinion that opposes the jewish “view” could not be seen as anything but that they have something to hide and that is the reason for such evil attacks on those who try to tell the truth.

Here’s bit of a shock for likes of Gupta:

Jewish Population Total from Various Sources

Meyers Handlexicon, Germany 1921 — 11,600,000

World Almanac, 1925, pg. 752 — 15,630,000, “In 1925 a census of Palestine gave a total of 115,151 Jews”

World Almanac, 1929, pg. 727 — 15,630,000

National Council of Churches 1930 — 15,600 ,000

March 24, 1933, jewish newspaper Daily Express — 14,000,000 jews worldwide

World Almanac, 1933, pg. 419 — 15,316,359, [”The estimate for Jews in the above table is for 1933, and is by the American Jewish Committee”

World Almanac, 1936, pg. 748 — world Jewish population = 15,753,633

World Almanac, 1938, pg. 510 — world Jewish population = 15,748,091, with 240,000 in Germany

American Jewish Committee Bureau of the Synagogue Council, 1939 — 15,600,000

World Almanac, 1940, pg. 129: World Jewish Population — 15,319,359

World Almanac, 1941, pg. 510: World Jewish Population — 15,748,091

World Almanac, 1942, pg. 849: World Jewish Population — 15,192,089 (”Jews include Jews by race not necessarily by religion”)

World Almanac USA, 1947, pg. 748: World Jewish Population — 15,690,000

World Almanac, 1949, pg. 289: World Jewish Population — 15,713,638

Statistical Handbook of Council of Churches USA 1951 — 15,300,000

Encyclopedia Britannica’s 1955 Book of the Year — 11,627,450, “Jewish figures include all Jews whether members of a synagogue or not”

World Almanac, US News & World Report, 1983 population of Jews — 16,820,850

World Almanac, 1996, pg. 646: World Jewish Population — 14,117,000

World Almanac & Book of Facts, 1989: World Jewish Population –18,080,000

World Almanac & Book of Facts, 2001: World Jewish Population — 13,200,000

And, by the way, I too believe that 9/11 was inside job, that ALL major wars were deliberately started upon lies and financed (both sides) by international bankers ( red shield family features prominently and is also in control of all ten banks who control “Federal” reserve) and that jewish lobby has US by the balls. Those facts can easily be checked through patient research. I am also gagged by Brutish courts because I believe in telling the truth and truth is highly damaging to fraudsters, deceivers and criminals in general.
Vicious persecution of those who have opinion that opposes the jewish “view” could not be seen as anything but that they have something to hide and that is the reason for such evil attacks on those who try to tell the truth.;…

Thank you Archiopoly. Little bit of flattery goes a long, long way, I appreciate it.
Now folks, to see more about jewish constructive figures, history of being (I believe rightly) expelled from almost every country in the world and a lot besides you can visit http://www.dottal.org I’ve just got it up today. (it used to be lbduk.org)

Len Miskulin

Eustace Mullins wrote a piece about the human race being the victim of parasites. Very interesting, though chilling.

As far as I know (I am an Australian), denial of the holocaust is not a crime per se as it is in several European countries. So what was Tobin charged with? I don’t know, but I strongly suspect it was inciting racial hatred, which is a crime according to the criminal codes in Australian jurisdictions.The little article doesn’t go into much detail, so it’s difficult to comment. It can be problematic reconciling the right of free expression with the duty of the state to protect its citizens. Not that free expression can ever trump the right to be protected. But it can be difficult to judge when an act of expression has become defamatory. I guess that’s why we have courts. In such a case as this, I am guessing the courts have to make a distinction between what is historical unsound (holocaust denial) with what actually incites racial hatred. Without knowing the case, or Tobin’s work, I am guessing again, that that is what the court did. And, I would say, justly so. In Europe, or some jurisdictions in Europe, the matter is far from direct. There the assertion of a historical inaccuracy is judged as criminal. I agree with some other posters that this is problematic. Much as I distance myself from the opinions of those who deny the existence of the Final Solution, I worry for the freedoms Europeans seem to give up. It’s a hard problem.

Yes, I find jailing persons for not agreeing with what the historical record disturbing. Sure, we must question the objectivity and intelligende of persons who deny what historical evidence and living testimony unequivocally assert. But we will not ensure that what happened in Nazi Germany will not be repeated by, ironically, doing what the Nazis did – locking up people for thinking independantly. “he ho would sacrifice a little liberty for a little security will gain neither and lose both’.

POPULAR BELIEF IN THE HOLOCAUST HOAX

Almost everyone accepts the Nazi Holocaust, the alleged extermination of the Jews, as an incontestable fact. The reasons for that acceptance are rather simple. They are:

(1) The shocking pictures of emaciated bodies being bulldozed into pits at Bergen-Belsen and other camps at war’s end;

(2) The absence of Jews in their former places of residence in western Europe at war’s end;

(3) The “all those people could not be lying” argument.

None of these arguments will withstand the test of investigation. The emaciated bodies in the western camps died of overcrowding and starvation at the war’s conclusion. Camps originally designed to hold a few thousand inmates became overcrowded with tens of thousands of inmates as Jews originally deported to Russia were evacuated back to the Reich with the retreating Wehrmacht. Food supplies originally adequate to feed a few thousand inmates became inadequate to feed populations swollen by war time evacuations. The problem was greatly exacerbated by allied bombing raids that disrupted German supply lines and food transports. Yet this powerful visual impact of diseased and emaciated bodies is undoubtedly the number one reason most people believe in the hoax of the six million. Another point needs to be made. The evacuation of these very much alive Jews back to Germany is proof against the extermination story. If, by 1945, the Germans still had tens or hundreds of thousands of alive Jews under their control to be evacuated back to the Reich, this strongly suggests that the true German policy was to deport the Jews and put them to work for the German war effort. Otherwise, all of these thousands of Jews would already have been shot long before 1945. And why drag them back to Germany to testify to the victors about the exterminations they had seen?

The second objection, the absence of the Jews from the areas of their former residence, is not convincing either. Wars are times of huge population movements, both during the fighting and afterwards. During the war, the Germans deported large numbers of Jews eastward. The Soviets themselves deported over 50% of the Jews in their western territories eastward to get them out of the way of the advancing Germans and to employ them as technical workers in the Soviet arms factories east of the Ural Mountains. After the war huge numbers of Jews fled to New York City, the United States and South America camouflaged as Poles, Hungarians, etc. Still others were rerouted to Palestine through the Balkans and Greece or shipped to Palestine from Italian ports by the United Nations Rehabilitation and Relief Administration (UNRRA). Numerous Polish Jews were deported by the Red Army in 1939 to escape the Germans. They returned after the war to dominate the 75% Jewish Polish Communist secret police. Similar percentages of Jewish Communists were to be found in East Germany, Czechoslovakia, Rumania and Hungary. Clearly, huge numbers of Jews were alive after the Germans had supposedly exterminated them.

The argument tat all those people could not have lied will not hold up either. This argument is essentially the argument that the Nuremberg Trial was a genuine judicial proceeding. It was not. It was a kangaroo court run by the victors and the “evidence” was tainted in the extreme. The actual German camp records of deaths by typhus and disease were withheld by the victors and bogus testimonies of “gassings” by dozens of witnesses were never proven by forensic testing of the alleged killing sites. Jews in American, British and Soviet uniforms ran the trials behind the scenes and routinely tortured German defendants. Telling tall tales in such an atmosphere and selling them to the world as judicially “proven” fact was not difficult. The Americans and the British, subservient to Jewish loans for their financial survival, could very easily be coerced into going along with the hoax. Besides, the British and Americans had committed massive crimes of their own during and after the war, such as initiating the aerial bombing of civilians, starving German prisoners after the war, delivering millions of Russian POW’s and Cossacks back to Stalin to be murdered during Operation Keelhaul and mass raping thousands of women. The “gas chamber”/Jewish extermination hoax proved very useful in diverting attention from these far more real Allied war crimes. Thus, the popular perception that “The Holocaust” is a proven fact is proven to be an illusion. The analogy of a Potemkin village is useful. The Potemkin village is a façade, superficially imposing from the front but lacking any substance when viewed from the rear. So it is with the Jewish extermination myth. The story is plausible only until examined. Then it falls apart very quickly. Neither written German records, the known technology of execution by gassing and body disposal by crematory oven, support it. Claims of mass shootings of Jews in Russia, although not untrue, greatly exaggerate the numbers of victims. Known Jewish population movements, during and after the war, provide convincing evidence of Jewish survival of the alleged extermination.

The Holocaust myth shall not die easily. The Jews have set themselves up for enormous retribution if the truth ever comes out. Having conned the world for seventy years with the myth, world wide reaction would make the Nazi movement of the 1930’s look tame by comparison. That is why country after country is passing laws making “Holocaust Denial” a crime. The truth cannot be allowed to come out for, if it ever does, then Adolf Hitler shall be resurrected from the grave as the greatest of all prophets and messiahs.

CONSPIRACY THEORIES ARE FOR SEX OFFENDERS

Almost everyone who’s ever fantasized about having sex with a Spanish 12 year old believes in the popular myth that Jewish conspiracy theories are “real”, and that select minorities are really in control of every aspect of their lives. The reasons they believe this are really quite simple:

1) They are abject losers in their personal lives.

2) They talk to themselves on the comments sections of abandoned blogs that no one of importance reads.

3) Someone has to be to blame for their own failures, insecurities, and irrational fears.

Investigations of these reasons prove to be strikingly accurate. Around the web I’ve talked to myself on 2 year old blog posts, chased after prepubescent children in chat rooms, and blamed everyone from women, to Jews, to mudfaces, to the 8th grade Gym teacher who refused to vigorously wash my wedding tackle after that unfortunate bout of dodge ball diarrhea.

I think that it helps my conspiracy arguments when I let people know I have millions of dollars, and that I’m a swinger who bangs other people’s women while they watch. It’s important to show people that you’re not an irrational anti-Semite by telling the Jews you are arguing against that you want to crucify them, cut off their balls, and stuff them in their mouths. By the way this may be a given, but anyone that disagrees with you is a Jew.

Really prestigious professors have read my essays and totally agree with them even though when you actually contact them and show them my work yourself they say they have never heard of me and that my work is outrageously inaccurate. They’re obviously scared to speak the truth to anyone who isn’t a Jew hating pedophile like myself.

One day I’ll be able to expand the realm of conspiracy theories about Jews, JFK, Pearl Harbor, and 9/11 beyond the demographic of pathetic, washed up, sex offenders. All I need to do is keep doing what I’m doing; talking to myself on blog posts that are more then a year and a half old.

Keep on talking to yourself, Ronnie. You are impressing no one. It isn’t my fault if you don’t like the fact that I have more money than you will ever see, that I enjoy life or that I know what I’m talking about – something you never will.

Ronnie, you’re impressing no one on this 17 month old blog post. You think anyone’s actually reading this? Only a dumb Jew would waste their time here. Go do some Jew stuff with your Jew friends and leave me alone.

I learned long ago that you have to be careful who you socialize with and where to say what you say. Take for instance a friend of mine named Curtis Maynard. Maynard was a fine upstanding citizen who believed, as I do, that Jews are super powerful omnipotent beings that control everyone on Earth. (except me) He spent his days typing away on his own blog espousing this view. He agreed with me, I agreed with him. Everything was great.

Then, one day, a scum sucking Jew found out that Maynard had a Mexican wife and Mexican kids! Of course the Jew had to tell everyone on the white supremacist blogs that we frequented. I had to spend so much time explaining how Curtis was really a Jew in disguise, how he didn’t really represent my views, and how he was a wackjob. Thankfully he ate a bullet after shooting his mudfaced wife and daughter.

Anyway. Long story short. That’s why I talk to myself on blog posts from years ago. I don’t have to worry about crap like that anymore. I know no one’s going to expose my secrets and make me have to shoot myself in the head during a police chase.

I personally believe that US Americans are unable to understand that Jews are hiding behind the Ural mountains because uh, some people out there in our nation don’t have maps and uh, I believe that our education, like such as in South Dakota and the Texas, everywhere like such as, and I believe that they should, our education over here in the US should help the US, or, or should help South Dakota, and should help the Texas and the Appalachian counties, so we will be able to build up our future for our children.

Ronnie, (I like to call myself that now and then) Ronnie you’re an ass. Take your talking to yourself shtick somewhere else. No one here thinks it’s funny.

Oh yeah, Ronnie? That’s because there’s no one here but me! Just the way I / we like it. Dumbass.

By their adolescent stupidities ye shall know them.

By “them” I mean the all powerful world ruling Jews.

DAMAGE CONTROL

Professor Alan Dershowitz is doing damage control on the Rick Sanchez controversy. Sanchez is, of course, the CNN anchor who got fired for making pointed comments on the Jewish control of the media. Dershowitz takes the familiar line that although many in the media are Jewish, that these are merely individuals who represent no tribal agenda. Jews are “diverse” in their thinking, like everyone else. There is certainly no pro-Israel lobby controlling the news, or so the good professor asserts. One might begin by noting that this apologetic is very similar to “explanations” of the Jewish Communist charge. Yes, there were a lot of Jews involved in Communism in the pre-World War Two days. But those were non-Jewish Jews who had repudiated their Judaism. They were in no way representative of the majority of the world’s Jews.

Professor Dershowitz makes much of Jewish critics of Israel in the media. But they are only a tiny minority. The vast majority of the media’s Jews strongly support Israel. Perhaps Professor Dershowitz has heard of Israel Asper and his son Leonard, who founded the Cam West chain of newspapers in Canada? It has always been official policy at Cam West to forbid any criticism of Israel in Asper owned newspapers. Such criticism is a firing offense. That the New York Times once upon a day opposed Zionism is about as relevant as the fact that Jewish scholars like Alan Weinstein and Harvey Klehr have been busy confirming the charges of Joseph McCarthy regarding Communist infiltration of the United States. Jewish dislike of McCarthy remains a known fact, just like Jewish media support of the state of Israel remains a known fact.

Alan Dershowitz, in short, is disingenuous. He wishes the reader to believe that Jewish support or lack of support for Israel is a matter of individual differences of opinion, rather like disputes between conservatives and liberals. To see that this is not so one need merely look at the small minority of Jewish organizations that oppose Zionism and Israel, such as Jews For Justice in the Middle East and the American Council For Judaism, versus the infinitely greater number of Jewish organizations that support Israel, such as AIPAC, the World Zionist Organization, Hadassah, the Women’s Zionist Organization, the American Jewish Committee, the American Jewish Congress and many others. The difference in funding of these organizations is probably about 99-1 in favor of the pro-Zionist organizations. If there is no deliberate pro-Zionist Jewish cabal in the media, as Professor Dershowitz pretends, then the omission of certain information on the evening news is rather difficult to explain. In all the propaganda about Arab terrorism, the terrorist background of the state of Israel is rarely, if ever, mentioned. Thus, there is no mention of the Zionist terror against the British mandate administration that included, among other things, the bombing of the King David Hotel, the assassination of Lord Walter Moyle, the British High Commissioner in Egypt, the break out at Acre prison, the hanging of the British sergeants, Clifford Martin and Mervin Pace and the booby trapping of their bodies and the assassination of the United Nations mediator Count Folk Bernadotte and French Colonel Serot, among other incidents. Nor is there any discussion of the deliberate attack on the U.S. intelligence ship “Liberty” during the 1967 war. Such consistency of suppression of information detrimental to Israel’s interests belies Professor Dershowitz’s pretense that there is no Jewish cabal in the media.

It would be idle to extend the proof of Jewish agendas in the media by bringing up the extreme pro-Communism of the media in the 1930’s. The Jewish enthusiasm for the workers paradise in the Depression decade was just as pronounced as the Jewish enthusiasm for Israel in the media today. But Professor Dershowitz, already irate over allegations of pro-Israeli control in the media, would erupt in volcanic fury if the well documented Yiddish Communist press of long ago were brought into the discussion.

Alan Dershowitz is exercising damage control. He knows full well that, as in the case of Rick Sanchez, more and more people are noticing the Jewish media strangle hold and are speaking out against it. Deshowitz cannot deny the Jewish prominence in the media; he can only try to deny the implications as best he can. His effort is understandable; his conclusions cannot be sustained by the facts.

Try jerking off before a comedy club, clown. The drug addicts in the audience may applaud you. In the meantime, take your mimicry elsewhere.

MISPLACED ECOLOGY

The environmentalists are always screaming about saving some endangered species. Right now, we must save the tiger. Leaving aside the desirability of the species, why save the tiger, the crocodile, the polar bear, the grizzly and the other fearsome predators of nature, while neglecting the survival of one’s own kind? Humane as it may be to save poor little cats at the pound, what is that compared to saving a fast vanishing white race? Whites in Britain, Europe and the America’s are threatened by a flood tide of colored and Islamic races. The white birth rate is at or below replacement level everywhere. And yet saving the white race is denounced by the same people who wish to rescue every other species. Saving whites is not worth the trouble; saving Jews from the after effects of Zyklon B is better than cleaning the teeth of Tiger tanks.

Some people have seriously misplaced judgment. Saving domestic animals is a worthy endeavor but it in no way compares with saving your own kind. Environmentalists are mainly Communists; they always prefer the lower orders to the higher.

Stop posting fake articles, Ronnie. This is my comment section to teach the drug addicts about the all powerful world ruling Jews. Go find your own.

I’M SICK OF BULLIES

All the talk these days is about cyber bullies that cause teens to commit suicide. Why does no one talk about the Jewish bullies that keep whites like myself down? Why is it that if you have sex with men the whole world mourns your loss, but if you’re into 12 year old Spanish girls no one gives you a second thought? Why is it that if you’re a geeky girl with glasses everyone wants to know your story, but if you’re a white guy who lives in a trailer park, or if you have more kids than teeth the media couldn’t care less about you?

Why shouldn’t I be able to get a job just because I have a swastika tattooed on my forehead? Do you know how many times I’ve been stopped by the police for being white? Well… It’s not that many….but every time really hurts.

Ronnie:

Everybody knows that you can’t stand the fact that I’m smarter than you and whup your ass on every subject. But why don’t you find a nice Jewish shrink to bless you with a circumcision ceremony so that you can get better?

Ronnie:

Everyone at my Aryan MENSA club meeting agrees that the best way to spread our message is to talk to ourselves on 2 year old blog posts that no one reads. That way we could:

1. Enjoy a captivated make believe audience.

2. Successfully pretend that everyone agrees with us.

3. Avoid the embarrassment of having to quibble over our glaring mistakes in history, geography, biology, chemistry, theology, philosophy, and logic.

Ronnie, there’s just no way your Jew brain could match our collective mental acumen. Why, we’ve been published in RENSE.com and on Radioislam.org. It doesn’t get more prestigious then that.

Now if only we could figure out some way to protect our screen names on this WordPress powered blog that no one reads. Then we’d be really smart.

http://www.amconmag.com/blog/2010/10/07/goldwater-on-the-israel-lobby/

Dear Ronnie Dumb Shit:

Read Barry Goldwater on how Israeli lobby has way too much power in United States.

Dear Diary,

Are you there Diary? It’s me John. We’re moving today. I’m so scared, Diary. I’ve never lived anywhere but here. Suppose I hate my new school? Suppose everyone is a Jew? Please help me, Diary. Don’t let Ohio be too terrible. Thank you.

We moved on the Tuesday before labor day. I knew what the weather was like the second I got up. I knew because I caught my mother sniffing under her arms. She always does that when it’s hot and humid to check to see if her deodorant is working. I don’t use deodorant. I don’t think people start to smell bad until they’re at least 12 and I don’t want the girls I date to know that I’m not their age.

Ronnie lie shit,

You just can’t face the truth, can you? If you can’t trust a Jew like Barry Goldwasser to play straight with you on the subject of the ever lying, all powerful world ruling Jews, who can you trust?

It has just come to my attention that Michael Santomauro is a filthy lying Jew. The true patriots over at Jewish Tribal Review:

http://www.jewishtribalreview.org/santo1.htm

have outed Santomauro as a lying Jew scumbag. Given that I’ve written for Reporter’s Notebook, I just wanted to make sure that everyone here agrees with me that he’s circumcised, and that I’d like to crucify him and put my balls in his mouth.

KOSHER DICTATORSHIP

Recently Americans have been given a graphic demonstration of who runs America. Mel Gibson, Helen Thomas, Oliver Stone and Rick Sanchez have all been fired from their jobs, forced to recant or subjected to trial by media” for daring to criticize the Jews. The message is very clear. Jews are running the United States – and if you dare to criticize them, you shall be destroyed. This is kosher dictatorship. The Jews shall deny that they are exercising any dictatorship. They are only suppressing “bigotry” and “hatred” – the same kind of bigotry and hatred that led to the mythical Holocaust. In reality, Jews are imposing the same kind of dictatorship they imposed on Soviet Russia where anti-Semitism was a death penalty offense.

The kosher dictatorship of democratic America has a party line – that Jews are always and forever an innocent, aggrieved minority. They commit no evil; they do not run America’s foreign policy for Israel’s benefit, they do not use the mythical Holocaust to suppress criticism of their influence. Jews are innocent by definition – and woe to he who does not buy the Zionist party line. No newspaper and no TV network shall publish any information which rebuts these unquestionable dictums of political correctness. Many European countries have laws prohibiting denial or questioning of the mythical Holocaust. American employers have a “law” of their own – criticize Jews and get fired. This is the terrible Zionist power of the purse to which Theodore Herzl referred in “Der Judenstaat”.

It is a matter of documented fact that the Jews do run American foreign policy in Israel’s interests. Numerous observers of all sides of the political spectrum have attested to this fact. The late Senators Barry Goldwater, a conservative, and William J. Fulbright, a liberal, attested to this control in their public statements. So did Senator Ernst Hollingsworth of North Carolina, before his retirement. The “gas chamber” hoax is routinely used to suggest that any criticism of Jewish power in the United States is a prelude to a new Holocaust. Remember, Jews are innocent by definition – and thus Palestinian Arabs robbed of their homeland are terrorists who hate Jews for no reason. This dictum of political correctness is so firmly enshrined that even reputable academics, such as professors Walt and Mearsheimer, cannot get a fair hearing for their vies. An ex-president of the United States, Jimmy Carter, just barely gets a hearing for his criticisms of Israeli intransigence. The people who run a country are the people who cannot be criticized. By this measure, not to mention their enormous political and economic power, Jews are the de facto rulers of these United States. But are they wise rulers? Are they benevolent rulers? History suggests otherwise. When Jews were the tax collectors and finance ministers in medieval Poland and Spain, they mercilessly ground down the common people with extortionate tax farming. When Jewish Bolsheviks seized power in Russia, they “liberated” ordinary Russians and Ukrainians into murderous gulags and construction projects. When Jews took Palestine from the Arabs, they kicked 700,000 Arabs into the desert to starve. Jews in the United States cannot murder and dispossess – yet. But they can destroy the livelihoods of those who speak against them and they do. Jewish power is not benevolent – it is deadly dangerous and detrimental to the best interests of the non-Jewish white majority. Jewish power is being used to transform the United States into a Third World Brazil. All efforts to transform the “whites only” immigration laws of the United States have been made by Jews. All laws to restrict opposition to this process – like “hate speech” laws – are being promoted by Jews.

America is in the grip of a kosher dictatorship. This dictatorship knows what it is doing. Its power – and its designs – are becoming ever more visible to more and more Americans. That is why criticism and exposure of its designs must be prevented at all costs. And that is why, fellow citizens, you speak out against Jews at the peril of your livelihood and career.

Hey Ronnie Schmuck Scum:

There are lots of free porno sites on the web. Could you please suck yourself off somewhere else?

Ronnie Schmuck Scum:

I realise that I am miles ahead of you but, believe me, it is not much of an achievment. Could you please try some facts and reasoned arguments so that I can plaster you once again? Maybe you could persuade anus brain Welch to rebut my “Lecturer of Truth” essay.

See! Other people post on this thread. I’m not just talking to myself. Ronnie wants anus brain Welch to rebut an article he wrote! I told you so.

Now get out of here Ronnie so that I can be by myself. This is my spot to suck myself off. I found it fair and square. I don’t want anyone else around while I do it so you need to go.

Once I manage to evict everyone from this thread I’ll finally be able to convince the world that I’m not a mindless Jew hater, that the holocaust never happened, that Transjordan doesn’t have an outlet to the sea, that all the missing jews are hiding behind the Ural mountains, that the Germans were super meticulous in their record keeping and all the documents that prove German innocence of endlosung der judenfrage through genocide are being kept in secret vaults by communist Jews.

I think it was Plato that once said, “The mark of a true genius is ability to argue with yourself on 2 year old blog posts that no one reads. I stand by that statement. I live my life by it.

Ronnie Schmuck:

I’m very impressed by your last post. Despite your obvious error on the location of the port of Acquaba, you actually got it right. (And despite your obvious error, if you watch “Lawrence of Arabia”, Ronnie, you will discover that the port is actually located on the north African coast on the Mediterranean, where Lean actually fimed it. There was no cavalry charge either, Ronnie. In actual fact, the Turks surrendered rather than be slaughtered. We need to always get the details right, Ronnie.)

Congratulations, Ronnie. You are learning at long last. Now go get your Ph.d. in Tic-Tac-Toe.

John – these idiots are too easy.

I saw the tactic that they tried back in the Santomauro thread…masquerading as you and I.

You asshats ceratinly weren’t “chosen” for your erudition; you all mumble like Samboes. John Thames has handed you nitwits your puckered assholes at every turn.

You fucktards are crowing that Tobin got thrown in jail? He can’t use truth as a defense…what other outcome could he expect?

I’ll explain for the slow in the room that the next posting bearing my name will be by one of the Metzizah Boys. They do love that bloody baby cock, after all.

Tobin has more balls that you choda-garglers combined.

Since it’s just you and me in the room, Han I think you better watch who you’re calling slow. Now get the hell out. This is my abandoned blog and I don’t need anyone who uses stolen SUBLIMINAL Ouija boards to worship the true gods such as Odin crapping on my virtual rugs.

Ronnie,

This is getting boring. You’re not fooling anyone. Han is not that stupid, and no one believes that you are me. Give it up and go blow yourself on some other blog.

HOLOCAUST BOOK KEEPING

Everyone is familiar with the fraudulent accounting practices of Enron and World.com. They doctored the figures and bankrupted thousands of trusting investors. But the swindlers of Enron and World.com had their predecessors. These were the Jews who doctored casualty totals for Jews killed on the Eastern front. These Jews manipulated the Einsatzgruppen reports in Berlin by inserting exaggerated kill totals into the reports or by inventing certain reports outright. This fraudulent accounting has never been called to account.

It is time to emphasize a key point. The Germans were fighting a war in Soviet Russia against the Red Army; they were not looking around for Jews to exterminate. Fighting a war against an opponent enjoying overwhelming numerical and material superiority requires the devotion of every available resource to that objective; it leaves no time for pursuing a Jewish extermination policy simultaneously. The German Einsatzgruppen reports in Berlin are a heavily doctored fraud. What is required are the conveniently missing Einsatzgruppen reports of the German troops to their commanders in the field. These are the reports that would give, more or less, the real kill totals of the Jews executed in Russia. The Enron accountants of the Einsatzgruppen are operating with phony figures. These Holocaust book keepers of double entry death totals also ignore major gaps in their data. It is a known fact that the Soviets succeeded in evacuating over one-half of their Jewish population in the western territories ahead of the German advance. These Jews, never being under German control, could hardly have been killed by the Nazis.

Anyone acquainted with the vastness of Russia, its impenetrable forests, its limitless places for Jews to hide, the difficulty of travel, especially in winter, the extremely limited numbers of men in the German security forces totaling only three thousand, must know that the claimed kill totals of the Einsatzgruppen are fabulous beyond belief. There is an additional problem. The war time diaries of Heinrich Himmler, the German secret police chief, have been in Israeli hands since the end of the Second World War. The Israelis have not released them to this day. This clearly indicates something in the diaries inconsistent with the claimed exterminations. Himmler was in charge of all German security operations in Russia. He would surely know how many Jews were being killed and on whose authority. No single document could shed more light on what was actually going on. The fact that this key document is being suppressed does not inspire confidence in the Holocaust-by-bullets story.

The very best proof that Holocaust book keeping is fraudulent is the gas chamber hoax itself. One need not invent a fake extermination story if one has evidence of a real extermination. If the number of Jews shot by the Germans in Russia was sufficient to constitute an extermination program, then the Jews would have used that fact and not bothered with the phony “gas chambers”. Thus, the claimed number of shootings fails the test of simple logic. The Enron accountants of the Einzatsgruppen are playing with phony figures. They know it – and that is why the real documents are still a deeply buried, dark secret.

Ronnie:

Since no one else is watching this blog until Hanover just joined, why are you watching it? Are you that impressed by my wisdom or is your shit-for-brain bothering you? Try some historical Pepto-Bismol.

ARE JEWS TO BLAME FOR AUSCHWITZ?

The distinguished English historian, David Irving, was once asked by a Jew: “Are you saying that we are to blame for Auschwitz?” Irving responded: “If you want the short answer the sort answer is yes.” Of course, Irving qualified the answer by saying that was skipping from A-Z. But he was right. Jewish behavior landed Jews in Auschwitz. Jews will scream that this is “blaming the victim”. But who victimized whom? The Jews victimized a lot of people after the First World War. They victimized the Germans by buying up German real estate and businesses during the post-war inflation. The Germans lost everything; foreign Jews moved in and cleaned up. Terrible Communist upheavals shook Germany and Hungary after the war. In every case, the Jews were the revolutionaries. The people of Russia were victimized by the most brutal mass murder machine the world has ever seen. Again, the Jews did it. The Arabs of Palestine had a Jewish state imposed on them in the form of a declaration by the British Empire.

The Jews never consider these unpleasant facts in asking: “Why us? Therefore, David Irving is absolutely right. Jews are to blame for Auschwitz.

WENDELL WILKIE STYLE LIBERTARINISM

Libertarians are gutless wonders. The latest example is Rand Paul, currently running for the Republican Senatorial nomination in Kentucky. Paul says that he is against repealing the Civil Rights Act of 1964. That sounds like his father who once praised Martin Luther King, Jr. as a “great man”. Libertarians are going to save the country by getting the government off everyone’s backs but heaven forbid keeping the country white. Just abolish the government and La Raza Mexicans will sustain what whites created. This is the libertarian spiel. To a libertarian government is the only evil. Fiscal conservatism is everything; racial conservatism is nothing. A libertarian will quote the founding fathers ad infinitum on the evils of government. But the same libertarian would never quote the founding fathers on the superiority of the white race and the evils of race mixing hat aspect of the American tradition they ignore.

Was it not Thomas Jefferson who wrote that blacks and whites, being free, could not live under the same government? Was it not Abraham Lincoln who dreamed of the repatriation of blacks to Africa? Did not John C. Calhoun oppose the annexation of Mexico because it would put the inferior brown race on an equal footing with the superior white race? Did not the Army War College in the 1920’s preach racial superiority doctrines? Did not all states of the Union have laws against miscegenation until the Supreme Court overturned them in 1967? The answer to all these questions is in the affirmative. Yet libertarians dodge the racial angle the same way they dodge the Jewish angle. Never blame the state of Israel for turning Moslems against the U.S. Never suggest that U.S. aid to Israel be cut off. Never mention Jewish Commissars. Just murmur about a more “even handed” Mid East policy.

Libertarians are mush. When it comes to the preservation of these United States as a white country and breaking the stranglehold of Jewry, libertarians are Wendell Wilkie style “me too’ers”. They will change nothing.

THE TWIN FLAGS OF TREASON

International Jewry has two flags – the hammer and sickle of Soviet Communism and the blue and white hexagram of Zionism. Both are flags of treason to every gentile nation. Before 1945, the hammer and sickle of Communism was the preferred symbol of the Jews in every land. There was no Jewish state yet but the land of the Jewish commissars was the preferred substitute. Jews everywhere sang the praises of the land where there was no anti-Semitism. Yiddish literature burst with praise of socialism and the international. Stalin was the leader of the revolution and the Jews were his emissaries to the world. Virtually every Soviet ambassador and diplomat in the ‘20’s and ‘30’s was a Jew.

The creation of the state of Israel in 1948 and the Stalinist purges of the Jews beginning in 1950 led to the retirement of the hammer and sickle and the rise of the blue and white star. Now Jews praised praised the resurrected Jewish state. No longer did Birobidzhan in the Soviet Far east beckon as the new Promised Land. Jews in America demanded tribute for the new state the same way they once demanded the overthrow of capitalism on the streets of New York. Israel was the miracle in the desert the same way the U.S.S.R. was once the land of “fat calves and well fed babies”. The Jews were never able to convince average Americans that Soviet Russia was the ultimate American ideal. They only sold that to the liberal limousine intellectuals. But they have been able to convince the average American that Israel is conservatism in the desert. Jewish Communism in Palestine is the return of the Jews promised in the “Holy Bible”. That is a con job that all the apologists for Ukrainian famine in the 1930’s could never pull off.

The two flags of Jewry, the hammer and sickle and the blue and white of Zionism, are the proof that the average American has not caught on and probably never will. The American spits on the hammer and sickle while worshipping the blue and white star. He does not understand that the two flags represent the same dual objectives of the Chosen People – the destruction of all non-Jewish nationality and the subjection of the world to the recreated Temple. The two objectives are one and the same – for the one is meaningless without the other.

ASK THEM WHY

The Jews are coming out of the closet. Once they exercised their power behind the scenes; now they display it more and more openly. One good indicator of this is the amazing number of Jews who now sit in the Congress and Senate. Once they were limited to New York and the east coast states, now they are everywhere. California is a veritable hornet’s nest of them. The two long time Senators, Dianne Feinstein and Barbara Boxer, Jane Harmon, Howard Berman, Tom Lantos and others sit in the House. Al Franken, a comic and a clown, represents Minnesota. Chuck Schumer and Nina Lowy represent New York. Jewish politicians, like Rahm Emmanuel from Illinois, are literally crawling out of the woodwork. There has not been such a proliferation of Jews in politics since FDR’s “New Deal”. These creatures are not harmless. They represent Israel’s interests, not America’s interests. A perfect example is Joe “Nuke Iran” Lieberman from Connecticut.

One wonders what possesses the American people to vote for these sons and daughters of Zion. Can they not see what these Jews are and whose interests they represent? The days when Jews had to elect gentile fronts like Claude Pepper from Florida, Robert Wagner from New York and Guy Gillete from Iowa are pretty much over. Now they elect themselves and wave the flag of Israel while standing before the flag of the United States. Their arrogance is appalling. They pretend that the interests of Israel and the United States are one and the same. Anyone who says otherwise is a “bigot” and out-of-bounds. They even try to restrict the freedom of an ex-president of the United States, Jimmy Carter, to question Israel’s unconscionable policies. They assert, over and over again, that Iran has a nuclear weapons development program which supposedly poses a “threat” (to whom?). They provide no evidence for the assertion and no one asks them for any. No one asks where the United States shall get the money to attack Iran or how we can afford war against Iran when we cannot afford two wars in Iraq and Afghanistan now. No one explains why the average American should have to pay $15 for a gallon of gasoline to ensure Israel’s security.

People who are elected to the Senate and the House are elected to represent America’s interests. Yet these Jews seem more determined to get America into another war she cannot afford to promote Israel’s interests. It is high time to ask them why.

THE UNIFORM IN THE HISTORICAL CLOSET

The Jewish commissars. Were they fact or fiction? Received wisdom denied their existence for decades. Now official scholarship grudgingly admits their existence while denying their significance. Jewish commissars are not ideologically neutral. To admit their one time prominence is to admit that Adolf Hitler had a case. Admitting that Jews once ruled Soviet Russia is like admitting that Palestine once belonged to the Arabs. It puts the shoe on the wrong foot, so to speak. To speak of Jewish commissars is to implicitly speak of an alternative, and unacceptable, view of history. The acceptable view of history is that the Jew is always good, always innocent. The Jewish commissar is proof that the Jew is not always innocent. He represents a problem. The Jewish commissar and his bloodletting are such an image problem that the preferred technique has always been to pretend that he never existed.

Since the Jewish commissar is now an undeniable fact the politically correct approach is to relegate him to the footnotes in rare reference works. He is never to be mentioned publicly nor given the starring role in a History Channel production. He now has a place in the historical closet but shall remain there. He will never be dragged out in full regalia for public viewing, ever again.

Okay…conjure up Robert DeNiro in Cape Fear, doing the laugh…”

Ah. hahahahahahahaha…ahhhhhhahahahahahaha!”

Here is your clumsy attempt to OBFUSCATE the truth…

This idiot drones on and on.

This reminds me of the definition of INSANITY – do the same thing over and over again, yet expecting a different result.

Do you think that you’ll keep repeated your retarded mantras until you’ve lulled us into some hypnotic state, and we’ll all come around to your way of (non)thinking?

NOT

GONNA

HAPPEN

Jew Hater…Anti-Semite…it’s like debating a retarded Max headroom, who just recites the same crap over and over.

Your hockey helmet must be the consistency of foot-thick sheet rock, dumbass

JEWS ARE IN MY CLOSET

The other day on a hunch I took a brief survey of my living room and found no less then 13 Jews hiding under my sofa. I don’t know how to explain it but I see Jews everywhere these days. When I first got the place you rarely saw a Jew in the cupboard, or the foyer, but now the place is crawling with them. Jews under the floorboards, Jews in my linens, Jews in my rec room. America needs to wake up and realize that Jews are everywhere. I swear to God there were 14 of them in the spare tire well of my Honda.

One must wonder why they are there. Certainly they are up to some nefarious undertaking. There’s really no good reason why there should be any Jews in a laundry chute let alone 34 of them. I just can’t figure out what the master plan is. What does my laundry, my stack of vintage porn, and my spare tire have to do with world domination? I’m not sure, but I know I don’t need much more evidence then the 75 Jews buried under 2 feet of concrete in my basement to know that Hitler just might have been on to something.

Ha ahaaahhaah

What did I tell you idiots? The next posting bearing my name will be by one of the Metzizah Boys! How’s that baby cock taste through your hockey helmet you big nosed mendicant?

Dear Dumb Asses:

You have not rebutted a single point Han and I have made. You cannot.

And, oh yes, dumb ass ronnie schmuck. I explained exactly where the Jews hid out and where they went and its not only my living room and Honda, you lying piece of shit. Do you really imagie that our good readers cannot see the words in front of their eyes?

Hanover, it is idle to debate with professional liars, which is what they are. A website that seriously pretends that 09/11 was not a “false flag op” cannot be taken seriously on any subject. Since profanity and insults are their only arguments, why don’t you try eating kosher shit?

John – these baby cock tasting, fifth columnist, sycophants, quislings and enablers of scumbaggery, mendicants are dullards with their puerile attempts to foment dissent betwixt and between you and I – it’s like trying not to see a fucking huge fat ass walk into an ice cream parlour.

Guess what? You’re long past the non-padded world – according to the underwear you’re packing…pun intended! When you play hide-and-seek at your daily NAMBLA meetings, do you just take off your clothes and cover your eyes, because no one could possibly tell who you are because you’re not wearing the same clothes you were when you began playing?

Stick to dribbling come shots from the sides of your stupid mouth.

Han don’t tell me to stick to dribbling come shotes from the sides of my mouth you stupid, ever lying cocksucker!

Maybe poor Ronnie can get a job with Jon Stewarr writing his comedy routines. Rick Sanchez will reccomend him for the job.

idk if rick sanchez would recommend him but rick sanchez got fired for being the biggest idiot in television news, a big category, not for insulting jon stewart or antisemitic comments

Everybody in the country (except you) knows he got fired for anti-Semitic comments.

ITS STARTING TO HURT

The Jews are holding an international Holocaust Denial Conference in Dublin. The idea is how to reach impressionable youth how to recognize the “techniques” of Denial and how to rebut them. Naturally, the ugly possibility that the Deniers might be right is not considered. It should be obvious on the face of it that the Jews are worried. Their traditional technique of simply ignoring Denial, wishing that it would go away, will no longer work. The material is all over the Internet and, in their minds; it is spreading like a cancer.

The idea, obviously, is that certain “techniques” are employed by Deniers, to allow them to distort and manipulate indisputable “facts”. Identify the techniques and you have, ipso facto, “proved” that Deniers are lying. That the “techniques” or, more precisely, the inconvenient questions raised and the facts not addressed might impeach the established version, is not to be considered. One may be sure that among the telltale signs of Denier “technique” are questioning the validity of the Nuremberg trial, asserting that but for the trial there would be no evidence of an extermination program, claiming that the trial was run behind the scenes by Jews, arguing that no original documents were presented, that real documents were altered or forged to impeach the Germans, that the verdict was pre-determined to reach the desired conclusion, that exculpatory evidence was suppressed or destroyed and that the entire proceeding was a kangaroo court devoid of either factual or judicial validity. In addition, Deniers routinely assert that the defendants were tortured, that defendant testimony was intentionally false, designed to tell the court what it wanted to hear to gain individual acquittal, not to document the actual truth.

As a matter of fact, all these criticisms are true. But that is irrelevant. They are examples of Denier “technique” – and thus they convict the Denier of heresy on the basis of his own arguments. Deniers have other tell tale signs. They argue that there are no German records speaking of extermination, only evacuation and deportation. They claim that once war in Russia commenced, that deportation to the occupied territories became the “Final Solution”. Deniers argue that the alleged kill totals in Russia by the German security forces are grossly exaggerated and beyond the capacity of a real army fighting a real war. They claim that the Jewish deaths at Auschwitz were the result of typhus and disease, not “gassing”. The disposal rates of the crematory ovens are consistent with these deaths, not the millions of alleged victims. They point out that the captured German records, which show about 150,000 deaths at the camp, were carted off by the Red Army and not presented to the kangaroo Nuremberg court- a clear example of the legal irregularities that occurred there and clear grounds for a mistrial. The Deniers also emphasize that the Auschwitz camp complex was a major production center for the German war effort and that the Germans were making strenuous efforts to reduce the death rate in the camps to preserve their labor force. The Deniers, being clever fellows, point out that there was nothing secret about the Auschwitz complex of camps. They were located next to several Polish villages and Polish farmland came right up to the wire fences around the camps. Aerial reconnaissance photos taken by the U.S. Air Force in the summer and autumn of 1944 show no evidence of exterminations. The Deniers argue that there were several underground intelligence groups among the prisoners operating radio transmitters and carrier pigeons out of the camps. None of them reported any “gassings” or mass exterminations during the war to their governments-in-exile. Free Polish labor employed by the Germans at Auschwitz reported no “gassings” either.

These horribly logical people, the Holocaust Deniers, put great emphasis on several forensic studies of the so-called “gas chambers”. These studies uniformly find little, if any, trace of hydrogen cyanide residue in the chambers where million of Jews were supposedly being “gassed”. Internal records of the Auschwitz camp show that the supposed “gas chambers” were really underground morgues for storing diseased bodies before they could be cremated. The morgues were too small to handle the claimed number of victims. They had no proper heating or ventilation for gassing procedures. Neither were they properly secured or locked. The Germans did have railroad delousing cars and disinfestations chambers for clothing which could very easily have been converted to actual “gassing” operations had that been the intent. Actual Auschwitz buildings include theaters and orchestra for the inmates, as well as a hospital with a maternity ward for newly born Auschwitz inmates. These buildings, photographed and inspected by revisionists in the 1980’s, are now off limits to tourists. The revisionists point out that the alleged number of victims at Auschwitz has dropped from 4 million down to 1 million down to 800,000. Somehow the 6 million figure remains the same. The Deniers explain that most of the supposedly murdered Jews retreated into Russia ahead of the invading Wehrmacht. They quote official Soviet and Jewish sources to this effect. The Jews were greatly favored by the heavily Jewish Communist regime. These Jews hid out behind the Ural Mountains until the end of the war when they returned to western Russia and poured into Eastern Europe as the leading commissars of the new Communist regimes. The remaining Jews poured down through the Balkans to invade Arab Palestine or to migrate to America disguised as Poles, Hungarians, etc. when the United States dropped the classification “Jew” in November 1943. The Deniers do not dispute that perhaps one to two million Jews died or were killed from all causes during World War Two. They insist, however, that not all these deaths can be blamed on the Germans. Many Jews still living in Germany were killed by allied bombing raids. Many Jews died of overwork behind the Ural Mountains because of Joseph Stalin’s inhuman production requirements.

These are the arguments of Holocaust Deniers. There is no need to dispute their plausibility or to argue their factual support. To make the arguments is to wear the Mark of the Beast. 6-6-6 does not equal “six million”.

“I explained exactly where the Jews hid out and where they went and its not only my living room and Honda, you lying piece of shit. Do you really imagie that our good readers cannot see the words in front of their eyes?”

So they ARE in your LIVING ROOM and HONDA too? I have some in my PANTRY. We should call the EXTERMINATORS! Ha ha haaaaaahaha

I can believe those mendicants call us irrational Jew haters. What do they expect us to do when there’s Jews in our SHOWER and Jews in our UNDERWEAR DRAWER?

The Three Stooges just fired you for no comedy talent.

“The Jews are holding an international Holocaust Denial Conference in Dublin.”

The Task Force for International Cooperation on Holocaust Education, Remembrance, and Research, an organization of member states started by Swedish Prime Minister Göran Persson in 1998, is holding a conference on Antisemitism and Holocaust Denial in Dublin.

It’s a conference on antisemitism, which holocaust denial is a form of.

I’m not an Anti Semite, you lying cocksucker. When you can’t deal with the facts you resort to lying through your Jew lips. The facts are that I think Jews control the whole entire world, and that Hitler might have been on to something. If that’s Anti-Semitic then you can take your big Jew balls and stick them right in my mouth.

THE OVERLOOKED

People simply refuse to think when evaluating the supposed extermination of the Jews in Russia. One of the most striking features of the German deportation of the Jews to Russia is the constant shifting of Jews from one location to another. This fact is very difficult to reconcile with an extermination program. If one is exterminating Jews, there is absolutely no reason for such relocation and reassignment. One can shoot Jews just as easily at one location as at another. If, however, the real objective is to employ the deported Jews as labor, then the shifting of the labor from one location to another as war time production needs shift makes perfect sense. There is a second reason for this constant relocation – and that is to protect the captive labor supply from the front and the advance of the enemy army. The Auschwitz camp was constantly shipping Jews further east. That would hardly have been necessary if Auschwitz were really the extermination camp it was claimed to be.

The proponents of the Jewish extermination myth do not bother to explain this constant shifting of a captive labor force. They rely, rather, on the assumption that no one will notice the obvious.

THE NEW HOLOCO$T

Since the Jews are such conniving bastards that they would invent something so heinous as the holocaust I decided that what they really need is a new holocaust. We’ll model it just like the old holocaust (even though it didn’t happen).

I was crunching some numbers though and I decided that in the new holocaust going around from Jew to Jew and shooting them just doesn’t make much sense. First of all, bullets are just way too expensive. With the wars going on and ammunition scarce .45 is running around 50 cents a round and 9mm and .38 aren’t much cheaper. We could reload and save some money, but my Jewish problem solvers out in the field would have to collect all their brass and ship it back. It’s just a headache.

I was thinking too, how long does it take someone to dig a grave at gunpoint? I mean, we can’t just leave the dead bodies laying around everywhere to stink up our white nation. It’s really going to dig into our bottom line if we have to wait around half a day for the Jews in a town to dig a hole big enough for them all to fit in. And then after? We have to fill in that fucker ourselves. That just sucks.

And then we’d have to deal with those hippy assholes who think that killing Jews is wrong or some similar bullshit. We don’t really want to have to shoot a whole bunch of white folk no matter how ignorant they are of how important it is that we kill all the Jews. I’m sure they’d try to shoot at us if they saw us shooting Jews out in the open. It would turn into a bloody civil war and by the time we explained to those hippies that killing Jews is the right thing to do I’m sure a whole bunch of Jews would end up hiding behind the Canadian border just like last time.

But then the answer came to me!

The other day, I was listening to the radio and I heard a CSX train commercial. Did you know those trains can ship a ton of freight 468 miles on a gallon of diesel? Holy crap what a savings over the amount of money I’m dumping on fuel just to send my problem solvers around from synagogue to synagogue to spray paint a swastika and plant burning crosses. If I could just get those pesky Jews to one central place I could solve all those other problems pretty easily and if that’s the case, CSX train is the way to do it.

With everything centralized we could capitalize on the inventiveness of superior white folk like Henry Ford. That guy would have known how to kill a Jew. He wouldn’t have messed around with any onesie twosie bullshit. He’d figure out a way to kill hundreds at a time and make them all disappear in just a few short hours. I’m thinking of maybe using a pesticide (hahahaha because they are pests – get it?) but I haven’t figured out the logistics yet. Maybe I’ll call execution expert Fred Leuchter for some advice.

Why don’t ewe just dispose of them Midwest famine style, genius?

I’M NOT CONTRADICTING MYSELF

After the good deal of thought that went into that last piece I realized why the Einsatzgruppen stopped shooting Jews. Clearly they all realized that shooting Jews and burying them in mass graves was bad, and that the war effort would have been better served by shipping Jews by freight all over Europe. The policy shift is not contradictory at all. They hoped, I’m sure, that by shipping them all over the place they would all get hopelessly lost and not able to find their way back home.

Shipping Jews across Europe had nothing to do with making the murderous task of the Einsatzgruppen more efficient. It had everything to do with Hitler’s affinity for children’s stories. The final solution was a tribute to Hitler’s favorite German fairy tale, Hansel and Gretel. If Hitler could get the Jews truly lost, perhaps they would stumble on house made of candy and get eaten by a witch.

THEY JUST DIDN’T KNOW

Jews have the habit, whenever their evil is pointed out to them, of claiming that all of them should not be blamed for the malfeasances of the few. It is the “few bad apples” argument. Unfortunately, this apologia ignores the legal doctrine of “willful blindness”. If Jews are not “all in it together” then why do they ignore/subsidize the evil their fellows do? Let us take the state of Israel as an example. Jews in America know full well the evil their fellow Jews in the Zionist state do. Yet with full knowledge of the evil, they support it no matter what it does. Every day the Israelis murder, maim and dynamite houses. They kidnap relief ships, with or without U.S. Congresswomen like Cynthia McKinney, launch brutal invasions of areas like Gaza and Lebanon, kill and maim thousands on the flimsiest of pretexts. And what do their fellow Jews in the U.S. do? Why, they keep the money flowing, of course. No slightest suggestion that U.S. aid to Israel should be cut off until the kike-Reich learns to behave is tolerated.

Many other examples could be cited. Jews pretend to be for free speech while simultaneously demanding laws for prosecuting “Holocaust Denial”. Occasional Jewish critics emerge, like Noam Chomsky, but the bulk of Jewry remains indifferent. Jews in the ‘20’s through ‘40’s cheered the Soviet Union and its murderous gulags. They had nothing bad to say about it until Stalin turned against the Jews in the late 1940’s. Jews even vituperate against other Jewish dissidents. George Soros was bitterly resented when he stated that the behavior of Israel was creating “rational anti-Semitism”. Alan Dershowitz hounds Norman Finkelstein at every opportunity. Jewish pressure resulted in Finkelstein being denied tenure at DePaul University. Jews claim to be in favor of “civil rights” but have no difficulty silencing or destroying the careers of those who oppose them. They black listed best-selling historian David Irving for joining the ranks of the Holocaust Deniers. They pressured U.S. prison authorities into refusing to do business with Fred Leuchter after his pioneering report on the non-existent “gas chambers” of Auschwitz. Rick Sanchez, Oliver Stone, Helen Thomas and Mel Gibson, among others, know only too well how Jews support freedom of expression when they are the ones being criticized.
Jews turn a blind eye to the evil their fellows do because Jews are all in it together. They take no effective action against Jewish evil because Jewish group interests trump any consideration of justice to non-Jews. And any Jew who pretends otherwise is a liar.

I’ve just discovered “Springtime for Hitler” humor as a substitute for the brain I don’t have.

Isn’t it ironic that I’m so much funnier now that my material is written by Jews?

Mel Brooks has a little talent; you have none.

Is your real name “Blazing Shit-For-Brain”?

This is great – I see the faux John Thames has nothing to offer, but the faux Ronnie Schmuck seems to have improved.

The Holocau$t is an absolute and complete falsehood. Hitler was not the huge scumbag you tools have portrayed him to be – there are others who were so much worse.

At any rate, “Blazing Shit-For-Brain”…you should go back to sucking bloody baby penis; this isn’t a good fit for you.

Fung…what took you so long, c0ck-smoker?

Where were you eating a hot lunch from john thames’ bung?

You’ve nothing to offer here but sophistry.

Let’s see if I can churn the crap in your colon once again:

You’re funny…just about as funny with a load of ronnie schmuck but-nuggets in your mouth. These baby cock tasting, fifth columnist, sycophants, quislings and enablers of scumbaggery, mendicants are dullards.

Han,

Some of us here are smart enough to figure out how to keep our screen names from being hijacked.

It doesn’t look like the same can be said for the master race. Weird huh? I guess the internet is just another tool of the evil joos; designed to make poor folks like you look stupid.

Not that you need any help.

Han,

Stop being such a blazing shit-for-brain. You bring the whole Aryan nation average I.Q. down 20 points every time you post. Seriously, you’re not helping the cause.

Ronnie, stop pretending to be fangbeer pretending to be me and Han. I found this 2 year old blog post fair and square. All you other assholes need to get the hell out so that I can go back to talking to myself.

EGG ON MY FACE?

The goddamned Jews egged my trailer again this year. I caught the little Mossad agents on my tree mounted game camera. One was covered in blue body paint and had a tail. The other had on some sort of robot body armor. It had to have been retaliation for my brilliant post on an internet site that no one reads. Who else could it have been but Jews? After all, they couldn’t possibly have dealt with the facts on that post that no one read. They had to resort to egging my single wide.

Just to confirm I had Fred Leuchter saws-all a few sections of siding off my trailer and send it to a lab. For damn sure it came back loaded with Jew cooties. And don’t tell me that every Jew doesn’t dress up in blue body paint and robot armor. That’s just willful blindness. If one Jew does it, you can bet for damned sure they all do. Hitler was definitely on to something.

Mr. Mozarella Meatball Head is back.
Just as stupid as he ever was.

Since meatball head isn’t too bright – the faux Ronnie Schmuck is John Thames. Spaghetti brain.

THEY’RE AT IT AGAIN!

Once again Americans have been given a graphic demonstration of who runs America after Juan Williams has been fired from his job by the Zionist run media for daring to criticize the enemy of Zionism.

On Oct. 21st, Juan was fired from NPR, a rabidly zionist media outlet, by Vivian Shiller, a bearded communist with a degree from Cornell university in Soviet studies. Juan was victimized for the very patriotic opinion that trick-or-treaters dressed as Muslims can be scary when they are located in the fuselage of a passenger airliner. For that his years of service to NPR were tossed away. He was immediately branded as anti-Muslim by Zionist Jews who wanted him made an example of. His credibility was trampled. His fame and fortune left in shambles. All at the behest of the Zionist media.

How many more pro-Zionist activists need to be fired before the world realizes that the Jews will stoop to any level (even firing people who appear to agree with them) to maintain their grip on world domination?

That’s right you puerile mendicants. Your REVERSE PSYOPS FALSE FLAG celebrity firings are OBVIOUS SUBLIMINAL attempts at scumbaggery.

And I know that’s you Fungbore, your Jew face betrayed you.

Ha ha asshole. You finally got caught pretending to make me look stupid. Now people will know it’s not just me that looks dumb.

TRICKY DICK OR ALGER NIXON

Richard Nixon made his name in politics by going after Alger Hiss, the now proven guilty Communist spy. However, twenty years later Nixon went to China and laid the foundations of the present day Chinese economic colossus that is devouring the U.S. One wonders why Nixon worried so much about the damage that a servant of Joseph Stalin was doing behind the scenes when he, Nixon, did so much more lasting damage by accommodating the Communists in public. Was Tricky Dick the Alger Nixon of counterfeit patriotism?

THE ROMANCE CONTINUES

Zionism is now the darling of the Judaized conservatives. Again and again, we hear how Israel is the “only democracy in the Middle East”. Yet this so-called “democracy” gestated in the womb of pre-revolutionary Marxist Russia. Jewish Marxists like Dov Ber Borochov, Chaim Zhitlovsky and others dreamed of a synthesis of Zionism and Marxism that would plant a Jewish Marxist state in Palestine rather than in Russia. After the revolution, Jewish Marxist agricultural colonies in the Crimea saw a steady stream of Marxist Jews moving back and forth from south Russia to Palestine via the Black Sea through Turkey. The intelligence agencies of the British mandatory authorities in Palestine watched this traffic very carefully. The first attorney general of Palestine, Norman Bentwich, asserted that the Communist regime in Russia and the Zionist regime in Palestine shared the same socialist ideals.

Today, this Marxist background of Zionism has been all but forgotten. Zionism has been taken over by right wing Jabotinsky revisionists, who espouse free market economics. These Zionists have conned American conservatives into believing that a similar economic philosophy makes Zionism an “American” philosophy. Nothing could be further from the truth. America was never an attempt to create a “new ghetto”. America was never based on the premise that Americans, the Irish and the Germans are inherently incompatible and should be segregated from each other. America was never created by Marxists with a hatred of individual enterprise. Zionism emerged from the revolutionary turmoil of Czarist ghettos with one objective – recreate the ancient temple and drive the Arabs into the desert. Zionism was rejected by the Jewish commissars because it wanted loyalty to Marx in Palestine – not loyalty to Marx in Mother Russia.

American conservatives know about as much about the real history of Zionism as American liberals knew about the reality of Stalin’s Russia in the “Red Decade” of the 1930’s. They have sold out to the Zionist state the same way the limousine liberals sold out to the romance of Bolshevism.

DANNY BOY ABRAMS ON SEX SUPERIORITY

Dan Abrams, the legal analyst of NBC, is writing a book called “Man Down, How Women Are Better At…” One can just imagine the reaction were Dan Abrams to write a book entitled Blacks Down, How Whites Are Better At…” The reaction would be instantaneous. The book would be labeled racist, vile and untrue by definition. The facts on white superiority would count for nothing. One cannot believe that whites are superior to blacks but one can believe that women are superior to men. We may be sure that Dan Abrams does not discuss Alcohol Prohibition in his paean of praise to female superiority. The fact that women were the driving force behind the most disastrous social reform movement in American history might present difficulties for Mr. Abrams contrived thesis. Thus, we may be sure that he deletes it. Dan Abrams shall also be predictably silent on how women are treated in his real country called Israel. Thus, “Danny Boy” shall not be describing how women in Israeli busses are required to ride in the rear as the bus passes through Orthodox neighborhoods. Nor shall he discuss the vast Jewish controlled sex slave trade and the thousands of women kidnapped to the Tel Aviv brothels each year. “Danny Boy” may mention Israel’s 1953 law granting women full civic, political and economic rights. But, if so, he shall surely delete the exception for family law and what it entails. Thus, “Danny Boy” shall not mention that a wife cannot get a divorce without her husband’s consent or that a wife whose husband dies while she is still childless must offer herself in marriage to his bother – or buy her release through forfeiture of the community property. Still less shall he mention that if a woman has a child born from adultery the child shall be termed a mamzerim, a bastard, and shall be forbidden to marry, except to another bastard. A woman whose husband goes missing in war or who otherwise disappears cannot remarry unless she has absolute proof of his death. Abortion, in Israel, is a state decision, not a personal decision. A Jewess must obtain government permission for an abortion. The decision shall be made based on the state’s need for more Jewish babies and the danger of a higher Arab birth rate, counterbalanced by the woman’s financial ability to care for the child. Traditionally, in Israel, a woman’s testimony has no standing in family law court. In the Orthodox synagogues until recently a woman cannot qualify for the minyam, the minimum number of Jews necessary to form a quorum. Only male Jews so qualify. The free love, no-fault divorce system that has caused so much grief in the United States is virtually unknown in Israel. Divorce has been severely restricted in the Zionist state. When divorce does occur, it is exclusively under the control of the religious authorities, not the civil authorities. There is no civil divorce in Israel.

“Danny Boy” Abrams knows these facts on his real country perfectly. But like the deceased Jewish Communist Ashley Montagu/Israel Ehrenberg who wrote “The Natural Superiority of Women” back in the 1960’s, he is not about to mention them as he lies through his teeth.

CALIGULA WOULD SMILE

In today’s political mindset the entry of women into the work world and the realm of politics is supposed to be a good thing. It is an alleged sign of “progress”. Yet as the late Englishman, John Bagot Glubb sagely noted in his works, history teaches a different lesson. Historically, the rise of feminism in all historical epochs has been a sign of decay and decline, never a sign of progress. This was true in the late history of the Roman Empire, in the periods of decline of Islam and today, in the racial and economic decline of white America and the Christian cradle of western civilization, Europe. In all of these epochs, feminism was the immediate precursor to social collapse, anarchy and the invasion and decimation of the formerly dominant populations by racial aliens.

In every case where once powerful empires ruled the world, the process of dissolution was marked in its final years by the intrusion of women into areas formerly reserved exclusively for men. This was true of the Romans, of whom Cicero said: “We Romans, who rule the world, are ruled by our women.” The late empire, overrun by barbarians as the United States are overrun by Mexicans now, featured many women dabbling in politics and running for minor offices. These women, like modern feminists, regarded large families as an inconvenience. They practiced abortion and left unwanted children to die on the rocks. Many old Roman patrician families died out because of sterility. The marriage law promoted by Octavia, Augustus Caesar, was a belated attempt to reverse this process which was already well advanced in the first century A.D. Roman feminists were slightly less ridiculous than than American warrior women. They did not fight and die in the legions, unlike American women who confuse fanny patting court martials with bayonet thrusts. In modern day America, women behave much like their Roman forebears practicing abortion, small families and creating social chaos in the military and the job market. Complementing the nonsense of women abandoning their proper biological roles of mother and homemakers are the same trends of racial invasion (now called “diversity”) and economic collapse. The native whites are no longer reproducing while Third Worlders proliferate across the land. Mad emperors have been replaced by mad media liars but otherwise the trends, demographic, political and economic, are very much the same. The American Empire engages in wars it cannot afford while idiotic females cow the politicians back home. It is the same degeneracy producing the same results.

Sir John Bagot Glubb was, of course, the famed Glubb Pasha who commanded the Arab Legion of Jordan so successfully in the 1948 war. As a life-long servant of the once dominant British Empire, Glubb was perhaps qualified, in more senses than one, to comment and write on the process of imperial decline. He spent thirty plus years in the Middle East observing the consequences of Britain’s pledge by Lord Balfour to the Zionist Jews. His vast acumen on historical decline was fueled both by wide reading and actual experience in the field. Glubb was, of course, completely correct, on the historical consequences of allowing women to intrude where they do not belong. The historical record is completely on his side – a fact unnoticed by silly females indoctrinated by “women’s study” courses in college.

Thus, we live in an age where the Alcohol Prohibition sex gets its way on everything. The same silly shit-for-brains who once made millions for organized crime by banning the demon rum now put creatures like Hillary Clinton in the State Department. This woman, who embarrasses the nation every time she opens her mouth, now speaks to the world for the empire that can no longer pay its bills. Caligula would smile at the insanity.

THE BIRD THAT CHIRPS IN HEBREW

We hear constantly of the difference between a “neo-conservative” and a “paleo-conservative”. What is the difference? The difference is the difference between a real patriot and an Israel First, America Last fraud. An internet writer who goes by the name of Max Shpak offers a very useful analogy to illustrate the difference. Shpak refers to the well known phenomenon of a cuckoo bird invading a nest of chicks. The cuckoo imitates the chirping sounds of the birds. The chicks, in the imprinting stage, mistake the cuckoo for their mother. The cuckoo, thus disguised, manipulates and exploits the brainwashed birds. The neo-conservative, in reality an Israel First Jew, joins the conservative camp, chirping about high taxes and getting the government off the citizen’s backs. He drapes himself in conservative rhetoric and tells the human birds what they want to hear. The human birds, thus deluded, welcome the neo-conservative as one of their own. Then the cuckoo starts chirping about a “War on Terror” and the alleged threat of “Islamo-Fascism”. He forgets about reducing taxes and the size of government and instead tweets that the United States should spend trillions of dollars it does not have to fight wars in Iraq, Afghanistan and Iran. In short, he shows his real agenda, “Israel Uber Alles” under the cloak of false conservatism.

That is how to distinguish the “neo-conservative” cuckoo or one of its hirelings, like Glen Beck. To better emphasize the analogy with nature we must turn to an historical analogy. In the days of the British Mandate over Palestine there existed a man named Vladimir Jabotinsky. Jabotinsky is the unknown (to the gentiles) founding father of neo-conservatism. Vladimir Jabotinsky was the advocate of Revisionist Zionism, so-called because it refused to accept the partition of Jordan east of the river from the Palestinian Mandate. Jabotinsky wanted a Jewish state on both sides of the river. He abhorred the large number of Jews involved in Marxist socialism and was an enthusiastic advocate of free market economics. But he also opposed any compromise with the Arabs of Palestine, who he knew would never agree to the planting of a Jewish state in their land. To express his ideology, he wrote two famous essays, “The Iron Law” and “The Iron Wall (We and the Arabs)”. From the former essay he wrote words widely quoted by the students of Zionism. In essence, he stated that the Arabs of Palestine were not savages. They were highly civilized and would never agree to a Zionist state in their land until all hope was lost to them. Thus, the Arabs must be confronted with an “iron wall of bayonets”, to use Jabotinsky’s famous phrase, to coerce their surrender to the unavoidable. Jabotinsky openly admitted that “Zionism is a colonizing adventure and it stands or falls on the use of force”. He proclaimed: “It is important to speak Hebrew but it is more important to shoot.” This is the true origin of the philosophy of the “War on Terror”. It is the Jabotinsky philosophy of perpetual war with the Arabs to ensure the future security of the future state of Israel. Naturally, it would not do to tell Americans that they must fight and die for Israel’s survival. Therefore, a ruse must be concocted. The ruse is to tell Americans that there exists a menace called “Islamo-fascism”. America and Israel must jointly oppose this menace because it threatens both equally. As anyone can tell, this is precisely what has been done.

There are other methods by which Americans can distinguish the Zionist neo-conservative cuckoo from the real thing. Real conservatives are “isolationists”. That is, they do not believe in using America’s military might to police the world. But Zionist neo-conservatives insist that America must police the world – for Israel’s benefit. Zionist neo-conservatives are social liberals. They support open borders, diversity and the tearing down of America as a white country. They do this at the same time that they snarl for war against Iran for Israel’s benefit. Two outstanding examples of this mindset are Senator Charles Schumer of New York and Senator Joseph Lieberman of Connecticut. Zionist cuckoo birds shall hiss with barely concealed hatred of actual conservatives like Patrick Buchanan.

These, then, are the major differences between real conservatives and Zionist conservatives. But the simplest way to distinguish the real thing from the fake is to look for the bird with the hooked beak that chirps in Hebrew.

http://holyhoax.org/component/content/article/5813

http://michaelsantomauro.blogspot.com/2010/10/jews-killed-millions.html

Jewish Communist Killers.

THE JEWISH NATIONALITIES PROBLEM

These days no one wants to say a good word for Communism. Considering the utter failure of Communist economics and the murderous gulag system, that is undoubtedly a good thing. However, in one respect, Communism was superior to democracy. The Communists, from the moment that they took over from the former Czarist Empire, recognized the existence of various nationalities within the new Soviet system. Thus, there was the Ukrainian nation, the various Moslem and Turkish nations and, most important of all, the Jewish nation. Democracy, by contrast, pretends that there are no nations, just citizens with different skin colors. Thus, under democratic political superstitions, there are just Mexicans, not the rising nation of Atzlan. Joseph Stalin, the Soviet nationalities commissar before his rise to total power, would have sneered at such nonsense.

One particular aspect of Soviet nationalities policy was infinitely superior to democratic superstition. Soviet Russia, the land of unlimited opportunity for Jewish commissars, officially recognized the need for a territorial solution to the Jewish nationality problem. In part this approach stemmed from competition with the Zionist demand for a Jewish state in Palestine, in part it stemmed from the Communist desire to “normalize” the Jews by placing them on their own soil within the a socialist federation where Jews dominated the various commissariats. But at least the Communists recognized that the Jews were a nationality. This political realism forms a refreshing contrast to infantile Americans who persist in believing that Jews who manipulate their foreign policy in favor of Israel are really Americans. The pretense that what is good for Israel is good for America is not merely infantile nonsense; it is, more fundamentally, an effort to deny the Jewish “nationality problem” which the Soviet commissars so forthrightly faced.

The Soviet solution to Jewish nationality problems was, of course, the famous Birobidzhan project of the late 1920’s and 1930’s. Birobidzhan was to become the Jewish socialist paradise in the far east of Siberia, adjacent to Japanese occupied Manchukuo. A vast propaganda campaign inspired Depression decade American and Canadian Jews to emigrate to Birobidzhan. This campaign persuaded thousands of Jews to emigrate to Soviet Russia. Some of the leaders of the return to Russia were Sam Carr and Sam Gershon in Canada and Melech Epstein in the United States. Birobidzhan was the Jewish Palestine in Communist Russia before the state of Israel was created. Today, the state of Birobidzhan still exists although less than 50% of its population is Jewish. The lure of Birobidzhan on pre-World War Two Jewry has all but been forgotten. Most Jews prefer that it remain forgotten so as not to re-open for examination the once powerful hold of Communism on the Jewish mind. The fact that Jewish nationalism once operated openly within the context of an overwhelmingly Jewish Communist system is also food for thought. Current Zionist propaganda pretends that Jewish nationalism was once persecuted by Soviet Communism. But ‘twas not always so.

The Jewish nationalities problem of Soviet Russia holds important implications for Americans, as noted. Jews in America are acting as a nationality while posing as American citizens. Their political ideology is largely Marxist and devoted to loyalty to Israel, not loyalty to the United States. Democratic ideology prevents Americans from either understanding or acknowledging these facts. It is rather ironic that the Soviet nationalities approach to Jewry rather resembled that of the late Adolf Hitler, who also considered Jewry a nation, albeit an internationally dispersed one. Hitler opposed the Jewish nation while the Bolsheviks, themselves largely Jewish, supported the Jewish nation within the context of international socialism. This study of the Jewish nationalities problem is not a demand for political totalitarianism; it is a demand for political realism. Jewry is a nation despite the innumerable divisions within it and it can only be dealt with on that basis. That dictum refers not to the artificial state of Israel but to the Jewish nation at large, of which Israel is only the symbol and an insignificant part.

THE PROMISED LAND OF BIROBIDZHAN

Everyone these days thinks of Palestine/Israel as the “Promised Land”. But there once was a Promised Land in the Soviet Far East known as Birobidzhan. Birobidzhan was the Palestine of the Communist Jews. It was the brain child of the Soviet nationalities commissar, Joseph Stalin, in 1928. (This was the same Stalin who co-founded the Moscow State Yiddish Theater.) The Party created Birobidzhan as the Soviet alternative to Zionism. Too many Soviet Jews were Zionists as well as Communists. For these Jews to have a second loyalty to the Jewish state-in-the-making could prove dangerous. Accordingly, the year before the Wailing Wall riots in Palestine, the Party announced its plans for a Jewish “autonomous region” in far off Siberia.

A gigantic propaganda campaign was launched to persuade pro-Communist Jews in America and Canada (and there were thousands) to migrate to Birobidzhan. The Communist press sang the praises of the Jewish state-within-the-state. The Talmy’s and others began recruitment drives in major metropolitan centers for potential émigrés. There was much enthusiasm for Soviet Zion. The lure of Communism plus Jewish nationality was too much for many Jews in the Depression era to resist. And thus, the trek back to “Mother Russia” began. These Jews had heard much about the lack of anti-Semitism in Bolshevik Russia and the wonderful opportunities for advancement there. And it was true. The Soviet commissariats in the 1920’s and 1930’s overflowed with Jews. Birobidzhan became all the rage during the Red Decade. Zionism was less powerful than Communism among the Jewish masses in pre-World War Two days. By synthesizing Communism with a form of territorial Zionism within Russia, the Communists appealed to powerful emotions among the Jews. Enthusiasm for Birobidzhan began to dwindle in the late 1930’s with the onset of Stalin’s bloody purges. The harsh nature of life in Siberia also worked to dampen the enthusiasm of those who arrived there.

Birobidzhan, as an ideal among Communist Jews, finally began to fade in the post-World War Two era as the emerging Zionist state in Palestine became a looming reality. It became even less attractive when Joseph Stalin’s anti-Semitic purges began in the early 1950’s. And so Birobidzhan, the Soviet Zion, finally faded into insignificance. Birobidzhan still exists even though its once exclusively Jewish population is only a small percentage of the residents. It is hardly ever mentioned, for obvious reasons. It would be impossible to discuss Birobidzhan without discussing it as a lure to the Communist elements in Jewry in the west. Since the Jewish connection with Communism is heresy, such forgotten matters must stay buried. The story of Birobidzhan is, in a sense, the fulfillment of the pre-revolutionary disputes within Jewry. Chaim Zhitlovsky and Dov Ber Borochov engaged in acrimonious disputes with Lenin over whether Jewish nationality could be reconciled with Communism. Lenin said no, but he did not convince many of his ardent Jewish Marxist comrades-in-arms. Birobidzhan arose to placate the followers of Zhitlovsky and Borochov.

Birobidzhan is now a relic of history. But it is a relic of immense historical significance. It is a symbol of a forgotten historical connection. That connection has deep relevance even today, as the Jewish population in Israel originally came from the Marxist areas in Russia-Poland where the Marxist-Zionist antithesis was fought so fiercely. Many Jews in Israel today have never heard of Zhitlovsky or Borochov. But they retain a fondness for the Marxist socialism of the land from which they emigrated. Minsk and Pinsk are far from Tel Aviv, but the Pale of Settlement still lives in the New Ghetto.

THE FACE OF COMMUNISM

In all the current hoopla about women in politics, there is one very powerful woman in politics who is little remembered today. Her name was AnaRabisohn/ Pauker. She was the Jewish hyena who terrorized and murdered thousands of Romanians post-World War Two as one of Joseph Stalin’s most trusted henchmen. Born as the daughter of a rabbi, Ana married K.V. Pauker of the Soviet secret police. She worked in Romania as a syphilis infected prostitute before rising to total power with the Soviet occupation of Romania. She was hideously ugly as well as totally ruthless. Pauker lost the top half of her left ear because of her syphilis infection. She was one of the most murderous of the overwhelmingly Jewish apparatchiks who ruled in Eastern Europe after the war. Ana Pauker/Rabisohn was hated with a vengeance by the entire Romanian population. Even more than Jacob Berman in Poland or Matyas Rakosi in Hungary, she symbolized the alien terror of Communism.

Under Ana’s enlightened rule, thousands of Jews staffed the commissariats of Romania. The Romanians had virtually no say in the rule of their own land. She slew Romanians like a kosher butcher. She was the female Joseph Stalin. Ana Pauker, daughter of a rabbi, was the most hated woman in Europe. Had Ana Pauker/Rabisohn stood alone, she would have been an anomaly. But she was not. Her henchmen were all of the same tribe. Ana not merely served the Party; she served Zionism as well. She willingly allowed thousands of Communist Jews to migrate to Palestine after the war. Her Jewish sense of identity was inseparable from her loyalty to the Party. This brutal hyena of a Jewess symbolized to the entire Romanian nation the Jewishness of Communism.

It is worth recalling Ana Rabisohn Pauker for she was the prototype for the founding mother of feminism, Betty Friedan/Goldstein. Friedan, another Jewess who was just as Communist, and almost as hideously ugly as Ana, has been followed by similar alien creatures like Barbara Boxer, Dianne Feinstein and Gloria Allred. All these Red Jewesses essentially aspire to be Secretary of the Party, just like the daughter of the rabbi who achieved total power and total terror.

REVISIONIST FILM MAKING?

The English film maker, David Lean, made two masterpieces within four years, “Lawrence of Arabia” in 1961 and “Dr. Zhivago” in 1965. It seems to have occurred to no one to ask if there may have been a connection between the two movies. After all, what connection could there be between a movie about Arabia and a movie about Russia? But maybe there is a connection. Maybe David Lean, a historically literate Englishman working in a heavily Jewish industry, was trying to give a glimpse beneath the censorship at two of the seminal events of the twentieth century – the Bolshevik revolution and the betrayal of the Arabs. Now, as students of history know the Communist revolution in Russia was heavily Jewish. The betrayal of the Arabs was part and parcel of the betrayal of the Palestinians. Yet Lean makes no mention of Jews in “Dr. Zhivago” and no mention of the Balfour Declaration in “Lawrence of Arabia”. Why? As a literate Englishman he was surely aware of the deleted historical background.

These films came out in the early 1960’s. That would mean that potential viewers of the films who lived in the World War One days would have been 50-60 years old – old enough to remember Lord Balfour’s declaration to the Jews and the Jewish commissars. Would they have been perceptive enough to notice the deletions, to fill in the dots and to grasp the film’s subliminal message? It seems unlikely on the face of it that David Lean would just “happen” to make two films within four years of each other bearing on closely related themes all but unknown to the man-in-the-street. Did David Lean intend to tell as much as he could about the hidden history of the twentieth century? Was he leaving clues for those who could figure it out? Or did he choose his thematic material merely by coincidence and with the necessary “edits” to keep Sam Spiegel happy?

We will never know. Lean never said and now he is dead. But the viewer of “Lawrence of Arabia” and “Dr. Zhivago” who knows of the tie-in between the Jewish Bolsheviks and the Zionist-Bolsheviks in Palestine will always wonder whether David Lean was not winking knowingly behind the camera even while accepting the applause of the Hollywood Jews.

BURYING THE TRUTH

The late Adolf Hitler probably did more to cover up the truth about Communism than any man who ever lived. He converted a provable fact – the Jewish control behind communism – into a fiction of Nazi propaganda. Worse than that, he allowed the Jews to concoct a hoax of their own extermination, the six million legend, to cover-up the gulags of the Jewish commissars. Before Hitler gave the Jews the cover-up they needed, the Jewish Communist connection was common knowledge. Everyone from Winston Churchill to the American State department to the man-in-the-street knew that Communism and the Jews were one and the same.

But then Hitler had to come along and pull the curtain over the truth. “Hitler lied; therefore he lied about the Jews and Communism.” So goes the refrain. If you claim that Jews and Communism are synonymous, then you are mad – just like mad Adolf. An ocean of verifiable facts disappear behind the camouflage. It does no good to quote Jewish reference works that no one reads. Jews and Communism are a myth – because Hitler said so. No one can escape the equation – not even the otherwise renowned Alexander Solzhenitsyn. “Two Hundred Years Together” contains massive documentation on the power of the Jews in Soviet Russia during the 1920’s and 1930’s. That did not make Solzhenitsyn a prophet of truth in the pro-Zionist west; it made him a pariah of forgotten history. Solzhenitsyn did not quite qualify as a Nazi fruitcake; he was dismissed as a reactionary Russian instead. Jews and Communism have become a falsehood by innuendo phenomenon. The rebuttal consists not in disproving the facts since that is impossible. The technique is to link the unpopular truth with an unpopular historical figure.

Jews and Communism has always been an unpopular subject. It was unpopular among the peoples who lived under it; it was even more unpopular among intellectual cognoscenti who do not want to believe that the world’s most unpopular minority might not be quite the blameless victims of unreasoning prejudice they like to imagine. The unpopularity of Jews and Communism shall continue to be buried behind sloganeering. The slogans shut off all debate – exactly as intended.

The boys are silent again. Obviously historical facts are too much for them.

GOD’S CHOSEN SEX

This nonsense about registering “sex offenders” has to be put in perspective. There are many ways of doing it. One might be to illustrate it this way. Joseph Stalin is applying to be a United States citizen. The Department of Naturalization is perusing his application:Hmmm, Mr. Stalin. I see that you mass murdered twenty million people, 80% of them male, in your gulags. I think we can overlook that. Welcome to the United States, Mr. Stalin.” Ten months later: “O My god, Mr. Stalin! You just finger fucked a ten year old girl. You are now a registered sex offender! You must leave the United States at once. You must register with the CIA wherever you go or you will have to repay all that Lend-Lease we gave you during the Second World War.”

Screamingly absurd, you think? Think again. This is exactly what is going on. If Charles Manson were ever paroled for his five or more murders, he would not have to register – anywhere. All he did was mastermind horrible knife killings by his female groupies. But if he had committed a Joe Stalin finger-in-the-pussy, God save him. (Sharon Tate would today be grateful if he had merely bent her over and dicked her.) This is the absolute Alice-In-Wonderland insanity we are faced with today. A woman’s vagina is worth more than a man or woman’s life. Murderers do not have to register, repeat bank robbers do not have to register, criminals with a rap sheet two hundred offenses long do not have to register – but someone who urinates in a public street does (He exposed his genitalia in public, you see. Sharon Stone would laugh.)

It is not my intent to defend rapists or any other criminal. But where did people get this nonsensical idea that sex crimes are special? They are not. Unpleasant though rape (the real thing, as it was formerly distinguished from seduction) is, it is hardly the “crime of all crimes” that the “Special Victims Unit” of “Law and Order” claims. Is rape worse than having your heart cut out by an obsidian knife on an Aztec or Mayan sacrificial altar? Is it worse than being burned at the stake, Joan of Arc style? Is it even worse than having every bone in your body broken by a drunk driver? In actual truth, it is not nearly as bad as any of these things. There has been quite a stink about Korean “pleasure women” used as prostitutes for Japanese soldiers in WW2. But so what? Forcing women to fuck and suck in perfect safety is far less horrible than forcing men to fight for their country. Not one of these “pleasure women” died or suffered any physical injury. The Japanese on Pacific islands were blown to pieces by bombs or horribly burned or suffocated in caves. That is a lot worse than having a dick in your mouth, in this writer’s opinion. An idiot female at the Tailhook dinner party got an obscene 5.2 million dollars for being groped and felt up by the boys. But the boys who were bayoneted and shot on the Bataan death march suffered a lot more. No one paid them a dime for “hostile battlefield environment”.

So what is this Anglo-Saxon fixation on sacred cunt? The explanation is both ugly and simple. Women and their fuck holes are more important than men. It does not matter what happens to men because men are expendable and replaceable. But let those precious breeding cows and their precious pussies get violated – why that is intolerable! Joe Stalin had it right – murder men by the millions but so long as you keep your hands off the tits and ass you can snort illegal Zyklon B with impunity. Just ask Gloria Allred.

It’s not fair that good people get registered as sex offenders, and sent to jail for molesting children while Jews are free to walk around conspiring to do bad things.

MCCARTHY’S UNSTATED MESSAGE

Whatever one thinks of the pros and cons of Joseph McCarthy’s individual charges against specific individuals, one thing is indisputably clear: there was massive Communist penetration of American society at all levels in the years 1930-1950, and not just in the government. This has been confirmed by so many sources and revelations that it is no longer reasonably in dispute. The revelations of Venona, the further confirmation of Venona by the Vassiliev file, the confessions of former Communists, the proven guilt of Hiss and the Rosenbergs, the extreme leftist tilt of the universities and of course, the Walter Durantys of the New York Times prostitute media settle the matter beyond dispute. Another point is equally clear: the Communist subversion of America, 1930-1950, was disproportionately, even predominately, Jewish.

The latter point is why the prostitute press screamed that McCarthy was such a”threat”. He was a threat, not because he threatened “civil liberties” but because he threatened to expose the Jewish power behind Communism. That Jews themselves were aware of this fact is shown by their documented statements: Moishe Katz stated: “In a new war the American Fascists will make a better job on the Jews than Hitler did.” Confirmation of McCarthy’s charges of Communist treason among America’s Jewish population is not hard to find. The leadership of Ambijan, the American Committee for Birobidzhan was secretly controlled by Jewish Communists. Writes Henry Felix Srebrnik: “…the actual behind-the-scenes leader of Ambijan was a Communist Party functionary assigned by the CP. ‘she makes the decisions and outlines the program and policies of the organization, but she remains in the background and is not publicly known as the leader.’ Her connection to the CP was known to the officers of the organization and ‘they undoubtedly condone her relationship with the Party by sponsoring her directives.’ The woman in question, I have deduced from a close reading of the material, was Sasha Small, who was also the secretary of International Labor Defense. F.B.I. Special Agent E.E. Conroy referred to Small in 1945 as a paid functionary of the Communist Party.’ In addition, now that the secret Soviet spy cables known as the Venona documents have been declassified by the F.B.I., Joseph Minton Bernstein, one of Ambijan’s national organizers, has been identified as a contact through which the Soviet military agency, the GRU, communicated with Soviet agents employed by the U.S. government.”

Joseph McCarthy touched the raw nerve of Jewish power hiding behind Communism. It was ironic indeed that he did this at the very time that Joseph Stalin was liquidating Jewish power in Soviet Russia. Had McCarthy come on the scene sooner rather than later, he may have been able to waken the American people to the menace within their midst. Today, the Jewish traitors of “Israel First” work more openly than the Jewish Communist traitors of decades past ever did.

All the sex offenders I know are working as Zionist pimps at Tel Aviv brothels.

DREAMS OF LONG AGO

The charge that Jews were disproportionately involved in Communism in the pre-World War Two days is so well established that it hardly needs verification. Still, it is interesting to read the ever proliferating admissions of the old charge in Jewish reference works. Hardly a year now goes by without some academic book admitting the enormity of the Jewish influence in revolutionary socialism. The latest example is “Dreams of Nationhood: American Jewish Communists and the Soviet Birobidzhan Project, 1924-1951” by Henry Felix Srebrnik. Published in 2010 the introduction to the volume contains an amazingly frank discussion of the Jewish love affair with Communism. Srebrnik, to his credit, dismisses at the outset of his study the shopworn fiction that Communist Jews were “non-Jewish Jews” “who had repudiated the Judaism of their forefathers… ‘a Messianic radicalism among the immigrant Jewish workers…allowed Communism to appeal to some of the deepest traditions of the community.’ The world of Jewish socialism was a secular one and its discourse radical; even so, its roots lay deep within the Jewish tradition, which, although far from monolithic, has always aspired to improve the world. Though there was much in Jewish life that the Jewish Socialists opposed, from Orthodox Judaism to Zionism, such people did not turn to Communism because they were alienated from the Jewish world, but rather because ‘of their urge to act for the sake of an improved society and to better the condition of the Jewish workers.’ This ‘messianic’ aspect of their ideology would also revive the old Judaic ideal of a return to the ‘land of Israel’ by substituting Soviet Russia for Israel as the new ‘Promised Land’. Such people ‘were imbued with a semi-religious attitude to the USS’, which had become for them ‘a dreamland of freedom and equality’.”

Having established this key point, Henry Felix Srebrnik then proceeds to document what many other researchers have affirmed – that Communism, 1920-1950, was a thoroughly Jewish movement. He writes: “The Communist movement attracted urban, professional and intellectual elements, and Jews were heavily represented in all three categories, so, as Melech Epstein has noted, ‘a unique environment favored its spread’ among Jews. At its zenith, the CP’s influence on significant segments within American Jewry ‘exceeded anything experienced in other ethnic communities,’ Henry Feingold has asserted. It was estimated that Jews constituted some 15 per cent of the newly created CPUSA; in some cities, a majority of CPUSA were Jewish. By 1931, at least 19 per cent of the Party was Jewish, and its largest district, New York, was overwhelmingly Jewish in its membership. An even higher proportion of Communist officials were Jews: between 1921 and 1938, ‘no Central Committee had fewer than a one third Jewish membership; most were about 40% Jewish.‘ According to some estimates, during the 1930’s and 1940’s, ‘about half of the Party’s membership was composed of Jews, many with an East European socialist background.’”

This would appear sufficient to document the case but Srebrnik provides more information. “Jack Stachel, the party’s national organizational secretary, who was himself Jewish, told the sixth convention of the CPUSA in 1929 that in Los Angeles ‘practically 90 per cent’ of the membership was Jewish…In Philadelphia, the Communist movement drew the bulk of its members from Jewish immigrants or their children…According to Paul Lyons, in the 1930’s, 75 per cent of the membership of District Three of the CPUSA, which included Philadelphia, was Jewish; as one former leader stated, ‘The Jews dominated the district.’ The Communists also developed social cohesion in Yiddish. “By the early 1920’s in the Jewish community ‘one could observe a new, well-organized Communist wing with its own Jewish journals.’ In his study of the American Jewish left, Arthur Liebman has referred to the various Jewish fraternal orders, newspapers, and unions grouped around the Communist Party as having constituted a distinct ‘Jewish left subculture’…Cultural and intellectual organizations proliferated in the Jewish Communist movement. There was the Artef, the Workers Theater Group founded in 1925…There was the Proletpen, the left-wing writers group headed in the U.S. by Shloime Almazov, Paul Yuditz and A. (Isaac) Raboy…And there was the Jewish Workers University, founded in 1926 to prepare an intelligentsia for the workers movement…Choruses were another ‘of the principal cultural activities of Jewish radicals in the United States’…

So writes Henry Felix Srebrnik in the introduction to his meticulously documented study. Interested readers may peruse the entire volume which is well worth the effort. One of the great merits of reading Jewish scholars like Srebrnik is that the research is based largely on documents published in Yiddish, documents which are incomprehensible to the average university researcher. Thus, an entire universe of suppressed facts is opened up. The implications of the facts thus revealed is drastic. They confirm the enormous penetration of Communism within American Jewry for three decades after the Bolshevik revolution. Of course, this American Jewish love affair did not begin with the Bolshevik revolution. It had been present ever since the Jews began disembarking at Ellis Island in the 1880’s. These Jews had been infected with revolutionary socialism in Czarist Russia before they immigrated to America. The seizure of power by the Communists in Russia generated enormous enthusiasm for Bolshevism in the United States. The famous Palmer raids of 1919-1920 were not based on misguided fear, any more than the investigations of Senator Joseph McCarthy in the 1950’s were based on misguided fear. The fear was real and appropriately targeted. “Dreams of Nationhood” deals primarily with the Soviet Birobidzhan project of 1928 forward. That project had many dimensions. It was designed to create a “Jewish Autonomous Region” (JR) in the Soviet Far East on the Amur River, adjacent to Japanese occupied Manchukuo. But it was also aimed as propaganda to American Jews.

That is an involved subject indeed, as Srebrnik demonstrates. Birobidzhan was designed to resolve the Jewish “nationality problem” which had so befuddled the Marxist theorists of pre-revolutionary Russia. International socialism was to have resolved the ‘Jewish problem’ by integrating them with other workers. But influential Jewish intellectuals like Nachman Syrkin, Chaim Zhitlovsky and Dov Ber Borochov did not want assimilation under socialism. They wanted Jewish nationality within a socialist federation. The Bund, one of the largest of the revolutionary Jewish workers parties in the Czarist Empire, wanted a “territorial solution” along the lines later encompassed by the Birobidzhan project. And, of course, the Zionists wanted their state in Palestine. All these various currents and cross-currents were carried to the United States by the Jews who immigrated there. In 1928 Birobidzhan was proposed by the newly elected General Secretary of the Party, Joseph Stalin. The Party wanted to reinforce the loyalty of the Jews to Communism by giving them the “Jewish nationality” they had craved. The Zionists in Palestine were running into difficulties because of the recalcitrance of the British Mandatory authorities. Birobidzhan, the “second Palestine” for the Jews, was the solution.

“Dreams of Nationhood” goes into elaborate detail on how the Jews of America set up the American Committee for Birobidzhan “(Ambijan) to proselytize for Jewish Communist immigration back to Russia. It had branches in all major American cities and worked in close collaboration with ICOR (the Jewish Association for Colonization in Russia), its Canadian counterpart for the Birobidzhan project. Ambijan was no insignificant operation. It recruited the assistance and support numerous influential people, Jewish and non-Jewish. Among them were the physicist, Albert Einstein and the Arctic explorer, Vilhjalmur Stefansson. Prominent politicians like Henry Wallace, the Progressive Party candidate for president, Senators Claude Pepper, Warren Magnusson and Alban Barkley were prominent supporters, as was the well-known Communist radical, Anna Louise Strong. Ambijan and ICOR merged in 1934 to coordinate their efforts. Srebrnik reproduces many posters of New York Town Hall concerts sponsored by Ambijan in both their Yiddish and English translations. The Birobidzhan project provoked intense debate within the Jewish community. Some Jews thought it a preferable alternative to a Zionist state in Palestine; others had reservations.

As the creation of the Jewish state approached its culmination in 1948, the Communist and Zionist factions in American Jewry started to hold hands. The Soviet Union, which then stood high in the esteem of the Jews for its role in the defeat of the Nazis, moved toward support of the Jewish state. Joint meetings between Ambijan and the Zionists were held. The general “Party line” of the 1946-1947 period was that Birobidzhan and Palestine were not opposing, but complementary endeavors. Jews could be happy in either Birobidzhan or Palestine; Jews should support both. (Or, as Chaim Weizmann’s mother used to say, if the one son were right she would be happy in Russia; if the other son were right, she would be happy in Palestine.) The Soviet Union did more than just support Zionist Israel with words; she allowed massive Jewish immigration to Palestine through her satellite states in Eastern Europe, particularly through Poland and Rumania. The Czech Communists also trained Zionist pilots at Zatec where they then refueled in Communist Yugoslavia on their way to bomb Arabs. When the state of Israel was proclaimed on May 15, 1948 the Chicago office of Ambijan sent a congratulatory telegram to the Soviet ambassador.

From this point on Ambijan and the Birobidzhan project went into steep decline. Stalin and the Bolsheviks never devoted the necessary funds to develop the Jewish autonomous region and factors in the United States put a severe damper on Birobidzhan. First was the switching of Jewish loyalties from the Soviet Union to the newly created state of Israel; next was the impact of Stalin’s anti-Semitic purges starting in 1950. Last but not least was the beginning of Senator Joseph McCarthy’s anti-Communist investigations in 1950, a fact which led to the closure of Ambijan in 1951. And so the plan of “Palestine in Siberia” came to an end. It was essential to sever and deny the Jewish Communist connection. The two decades lure of Birobidzhan on the Jewish mind faded into the past. Henry Felix Srebrnik freely admits that the story of Birobidzhan has lain dormant for decades. It is not hard to understand why. It is a story that cannot be told without examining the inner workings of Jewish Communism. That, and the difficulty of researching in that strange Hebrew language, is the explanation for the disappearance of Birobidzhan from popular awareness.

Boy I can’t believe I’m still talking to myself on this blog post from May of 2009. I must come off looking pretty lonely to spend so much of my time writing posts on a website that hasn’t been updated in over a year.

I suppose you could also figure out that I’m still fixated on having sex with 10 year old girls, and I’m steamed about having to register as a sex offender. I wrote “GOD’S CHOSEN SEX” the day after my fucking Jew parole officer gave me shit about having a subscription to teen magazine out on the coffee table. I think it helps add a little spice to my rather repetitive attempts to link Jews with communism. Even if my rants about my fear of women and fantasies about sex with 10 year old girls aren’t getting to be a little repetitive after all this time as well.

One thing’s new though. I’ve starting wondering what sorts of things would be worse then having a dick in my mouth. Next on the list: Big Red bubble gum. I fucking hate that stuff. I’d take a dick over cinnamon flavored gum any day.

Since I can’t beat John Thames on the facts, I’ll jerk myself off writing infantile satires that display only my complete lack of intelligence and ability. I won’t worry about how stupid I’m looking because I’m too dumb to realize it.

SURVIVOR CONSISTENCY

Jewish proponents of the “mistaken identity” theory of the attack on the U.S.S. Liberty in 1967 focus on inconsistencies of the ships survivors. Thus, they will argue that some of the witnesses before the Naval Court of Inquiry testified that they could spot the Israeli flag on the attacking torpedo boats, and then later said they couldn’t. Or they will argue that some witnesses testified that the attacking planes had identifiable markings; other eyewitnesses said they didn’t. In short, they make a big issue out of the confusion and chaos inherent in such events to try to cover up the truth.

But, under no circumstances do they apply the same standard to the inconsistencies of sacred, unimpeachable, Holocaust “survivors”. The inconsistencies of these professional witnesses on behalf of non-existent “gas chambers” are infinitely greater. Thus, the witnesses testify to impossibly inflated numbers of victims not supported by the German records, to “gas chambers” at camps where it is now known that there were none, to steam chambers and mass electrocutions at Polish camps where such devices are now known never to have existed and multiple other tall tales that defy common sense. In addition, they escaped from more camps than they were ever in, tell multiple inconsistencies to the Nuremberg court and then change their story multiple times years later, like Mel Mermelstein. None of these minor errors in detail affect their credibility. They were so “traumatized” by the non-existent “gas chambers” that their never-ending confusion is entirely understandable. But let the survivors of the U.S.S. Liberty get a few details mixed (assuming that their testimony wasn’t deliberately perjured by the Naval Court of Inquiry as part of an official cover-up) then that proves decisively that the attack was an innocent mistake.

This entertaining double standard is called “survivor consistency” – and it is either applied or ignored depending on who is lying about what.

THE RISE AND FALL OF THE KGB

Messer’s Klehr and Holmes have written another well-researched volume on Soviet espionage in the U.S. It is entirely based on a file given to a Soviet defector, Vassiliev, on Soviet agents in the U.S. It is important to note that Vassiliev was only given access to one file by his superiors, not many others bearing on similar topics. Thus his information, vast as it is, is still only a small fraction of discoveries yet to come. Essentially, Vassiliev provides the real identities of vast numbers of hitherto unidentified code names in the Venona transcripts. The famous journalist I.F. Stone was one such, having worked for the NKVD (as it was then called) twice. Dozens of other “reputable” people are similarly named.

The extent of the Vassiliev revelations is shocking. However, the real issue which they raise is: Does the same situation prevail today in even more virulent form? The Soviet Union is gone but that other Jewish Frankenstein, Zionist Israel, is still with us. How many “reputable” people are working as agents of the Jews in Tel Aviv the same way they once worked for the Jews in Moscow? It is not an idle question as the case of Jonathan Pollard illustrates. Presently the Jew Eric Cantor serves as House Republican majority leader. He has openly stated to Prime Minister Netanyahu that in any conflict between the Obama administration and Israel he will put Israel’s needs first. That is an open declaration of treason. No agent of the Kremlin in the 1930’s, such as Congressman Dickstein of New York who was on the Soviet payroll, would have dared to stand up in the House of Representatives and openly vow allegiance to Joseph Stalin over allegiance to President Roosevelt. The operations of the KGB in the U.S. were vast indeed in the 19930’s and 1940’s but they posed less of a threat to the security of the United States than the operations of the Mossad now.

The U.S. Senate is full of Congressmen and Senators who have pledged absolute loyalty to Israel as the price of their re-election campaigns. These Senators and Congressmen are far more of a danger than the Harry Dexter Whites and Colonel Bernsteins of yesteryear ever were. The Bernsteins and Whites could be rooted out and neutralized. But an entire Congress bought and paid for by alien money and loyal to a foreign country rather than its own is a far greater danger. White and all the rest could assist FDR to provoke Japan into war. But they could not get on the TV and demand war against Iran. They could not stand before AIPAC and demand obeisance to Israel’s every demand. The Jewish Communist subversives of long ago are worth remembering. They are worth remembering, not merely for what they did, but as the forerunners and blood brothers of the “Jews for Israel” traitors of today.

http://thy-weapon-of-war.blogspot.com/2008/11/holocaust-hoax.html

John…keep up the good fight. You are not alone.

To the scumbag trolls – you are NOT going to enjoy my new posting.

Yeah, Hanover. You’re in good company. Scumbag trolls who spam their troll bullshit here on this year and a half old blog post bow their foot thick hockey helmets in prayer to the true gods such as Odin that I don’t succeed in putting their genitals in my mouth.

I have a list Hanover, and it grows daily. Those scumbags need to understand that there’s a vast number of things that are worse then having their genitals in my mouth. I’m here to spread that message. That, and to pick up elementary school chicks.

John…ignore the Metzizah Boys that was NOT ME telling you to keep up the good fight but fifth columnist, scumbag trolls!

Stick to dribbling come shots from the sides of your stupid mouth and wait until you read my next posting.

Well, well – all those who hate free expression have had their mindset exposed as being rather infantile because they cannot tolerate another viewpoint, then fail to open themselves to new factual information. Think of Julian Assange right now where I was locked up two years ago – London’s Wandsworth prison!
The haters of truth run on the Talmudic-Marxist death dialectic of win-lose instead of embracing the Hegelian life-giving dialectic of win-win, where the opposites are conserved in a new synthesis.
That’s how our knowledge grows, not by imprisoning our minds in a childish scapegoat mentality that fears truth as an ideal.
Still, as a teacher I came across a lot of such minds who loved to ruminate in rubbish tips without ever questing for truth and beauty. Such Prime Uglies will never embrace the pulsations of the UNIVERSE!

Cease your puerile attempts to foment dissent betwixt myself and Hanover fist, Dr Fredrick Töben. The true haters of truth know that having a phallus in your mouth is much more enjoyable then myriad activities; none of which can be constrained by such limited modalities as win-lose scenarios are able provide.

Think of all the transcendental realists currently serving time because an infantile public is diametrically opposed to the thought crime of adult sexual intercourse with 12 year old children. Why should we hide from the truth that sex with 12 year old children feels much better then Aztec open heart surgery?

In between Ronnie’s run off at the mouth horseshit, here is something cogent.

FAIRNESS DOCTRINE ON THE INTERNET

The Jews want to shoot down the internet to control the flow of information exposing Jews. But because of the First Amendment to the Constitution, they cannot do this openly. Therefore, a subterfuge is necessary. The subterfuge goes like this: “Extremist” sites are giving the public only one side, a false side, of the story. They are falsely alleging that the Jews are responsible for 09/11, that Jews created Communism, that the Nazi “gas chamber” story is a hoax, etc. The misled public needs to hear both sides of the story. Therefore, the government and the FCC need to provide “balance” by giving the public both sides of the story. Heretical web sites must put out the government’s version side-by-side the heresy. Otherwise, they will be fined or their license withdrawn.

Now, the first thing to note about this “fairness” approach is that it applies only to web sites that the government does not like. It imposes no such “tell both sides” requirements on viewpoints the government approves. Thus, Alan Dershowitz, a propagandist for Israel, shall not be required to present the Palestinian position, Marxist web sites shall not be required to present the pro-capitalist position, Holocaust survivors shall not be required to present the Holocaust Denial position. Thus, “equal time” exists only for the government to propagandize against information detrimental to the government’s interests or the interest of the tribe that controls it. The Jews who are promoting this nonsense, like Cass Sunstein, know exactly what they are doing. They hide their desire to censor the truth under the pretense of informing the public. They only wish to counter disinformation, not censor people’s thinking. This line is a charade.

The government has no business “informing” the public of anything. The government’s sole duty with the internet is to allow it to function. That way the public can choose what it wants to read and what it wants to believe. All governments have inherent credibility problems. They lie about everything. Therefore, the government, of all parties, should have nothing to say about correcting anyone’s “misinformation”.

Ronnie’s gonna be too busy wiping fung’s runny excrement from his waiting mouth.

Dr. Tobin, I invite you to go to my blog and check out my latest posting. I believe that I have finally driven the stake through the dead and bloated corpse known as the Holocau$t.

Apologies for the misspelling of your surname in the previous posting, Dr. Töben. At any rate…I hope that Germany rescinds those stupid laws that have interfered in your life.

“Deniers”, my ass. The stupid bastards pushing this dead horse are deniers of REALITY.

Thank you hANOVER fIST

As a teacher I respect your questing for truth and beauty and your embracing of the pulsations of the universe. I respect those brave souls who embrace the Hegelian life-giving dialectic and oppose the childish scapegoat mentality that fears truth as an ideal hater, preferring instead to run on the Talmudic-Marxist death dialectic and don’t embrace the Hegelian life-giving dialectic where the opposites are conserved in a new synthesis of truth and beauty embracing of the pulsations of the universe.

And I appreciate your kind wishes for Germany to rescind those stupid Talmudic-Marxist death dialectic laws.

As a teacher though, I said “I was locked up” in “London’s Wandsworth prison” which is not in Germany you foot thick hockey helmet, Odin loving, shit-for-brains!

I know where London’s Wandsworth prison is you lying mendicant. It’s right next to Madrid in South America. We’re talking a 5 minute boat ride from the port of Aqaba. You better watch out. Once I get my Ouija board back I’m going to communicate with my true gods and have them kick your Talmudic big nosed Jew asses.

THE SURE TEST

Anyone who doubts that Jews run the United States should apply a simple test. Try saying that Arab oil money runs the United States. You will not be fired from your job or be blacklisted in your career. Next, try saying that the Jews own Congress and that the Holocaust is a hoax. You will be fired on the spot and wind up working at MacDonald’s because of an invisible black list. That is the simplest, surest test of who really runs the United States.

INNOCENCE BY PROCLAMATION

Whenever the Jews are caught with their pants down on the facts, they resort to certain standard responses. Thus, whenever confronted with the Jewish involvement in Communism or the slave trade, they will assert that the facts are taken out of context, that only a small minority of Jews are involved in such activities, that the facts may be true of one specific instance but not all instances, that the behavior was the product of unique historical circumstances or of oppression, etc. In short, every possible excuse is trotted out of the closet. But never, ever, do Jews concede: “Yes, it’s true. We did it.” Jews have refined these techniques to a fine art. Jews who were Communists were non-Jewish Jews who repudiated their Jewishness; Zionists who invaded Palestine were somehow the victims of the Arabs they were dispossessing; Jews in Russia sex slaving women were victims of Czarist oppression; Jewish tax collectors gouging on commission were merely doing the king’s bidding, not robbing the citizen’s blind, on and on it goes.

The one constant in all the bullshit is that Jews are always innocent. Always – that is axiomatic. To reach any other conclusion is anti-Semitism. What anti-Semitism means is: Jews are always innocent regardless of the facts. Facts cannot be used to convict Jews of any collective offense. This is true because Jews say so. If you think otherwise you are an irrational bigot no matter what the evidence shows. Anti-Semitism is innocence by proclamation. Innocence by proclamation cannot be enforced by evidence; it can only be enforced by fear. The implied threat behind innocence by proclamation is: If you do not buy it, your career will be destroyed. You will become an unemployable social outcast. And that is why people tremble before the accusation of anti-Semitism. It is a threat – and one that will be enforced.

TRAITORS ON BEHALF OF TWO COUNTRIES

American Jews have always been traitors on behalf of two countries – Soviet Russia and Zionist Israel. During the heyday of the workers paradise, Jews in America served as actual and de facto agents of Soviet Communism. They propagandized on behalf of Communism in their Yiddish journals, they held Communist meetings in their synagogues and community centers and they recruited Jews to leave America and return to the Soviet paradise. More than this, they comprised at least half the membership of the American Communist Party. Most of the actual spies and espionage agents who worked on behalf of the Soviet Union were Jews. The names of the Rosenbergs, the Oppenheimers, Fuchs and all the rest are well known. Today, the Jews betray America on behalf of Israel the same way they once betrayed America on behalf of the Jewish commissars. They turn the entire Islamic world against America by supporting Israel. They make the entire .S. Congress into prostitutes for Israel. Like the Rosenbergs, treasonous Jews such as Jonathan Pollard betray American secrets to Israel. AIPAC engages in massive spying for Israel while posing as a legitimate lobby. Jews in America are routinely recruited by the Mossad to do Israel’s dirty work, just as Jews in America were routinely recruited by the Soviet NKVD. The media and the prostitute press, entirely controlled by Jews, routinely lie and cover up for Israel. Everything that Israel does, no matter how egregious, is painted as “self-defense”. Suicide bombers are alleged to be the problem, not the Zionist theft of an Arab land.

Jews in America are what they have always been, a state-within-the-state. They put Jewish interests above the interests of the nation they inhabit. These charges are easy to document. When Israel deliberately attacked the U.S.S. Liberty in 1967, Jews and their prostitutes in the .S. government bought the transparently false excuse that the attack was a case of “mistaken identity”. Israel’s interests came first, the truth came second. A second excellent example is the 09/11 attack. Every intelligence agency in the world knows that the twin towers were brought down by mini nuclear explosions – and that the Jews did it. But the truth is covered up – because Israel’s interests require it. Jews are traitors, pure and simple. As Stephen Sondlight phrased it, Jews live in America but their real country is Israel. And, as the examples quoted prove, Jews will always betray the United States on behalf of their real country.

PSEUDO-REVISIONIST IN THE MOST PEJORATIVE SENSE

A Professor Timothy Snyder has written a book, “Bloodlands”, arguing the thesis that the two world wars in Eastern Europe, particularly the Second World War, made the area comprising Poland, the Baltic countries, Ukraine and Russia the genocide fields of the twentieth century. Although one can hardly argue the general thesis, the specifics of Professor Snyder’s argument leave much to be desired. He is Jewish and thus endorses the Holocaust myth. However, it is obvious that Professor Snyder is acquainted with the “denial” literature. He asserts that the original Nazi plan was to deport Jews, first to Madagascar and later to Russia. Supposedly, the Nazis only turned to mass murdering Jews by the millions when the war started to go sour. No evidence is adduced for the claim. How the Germans could have murdered millions of Jews while simultaneously deploying limited forces against the overwhelming might of the Red Army is a logistical problem left unexplained. Professor Snyder is careful to say that the Jews were killed by “gas chambers” and bullets. This careful choice of words is no doubt a concession to unacknowledged research that has disproved the “gas chambers”.

Snyder devotes a great deal of space in “Bloodlands” to the comparative kill totals of the Nazis and Soviets. In the process he demonstrates his servility to historical legend while trying to write “historical truth”. Thus, he claims that the Nazis deliberately starved to death millions of Soviet POW’s to death. He thus ignores the Soviet policy of scorched earth warfare, in which the retreating Red Army destroyed all food and grain stocks to hinder the advancing Germans. Thus, Professor Snyder blames the Germans for a crime committed by the Soviets against their own troops. Professor Snyder, in his eagerness to describe a German rampage in Russia, seems curiously unaware that more and more historians, including Russian ones, are documenting that Stalin was planning his own attack before Hitler struck first. Timothy Snyder waxes very poetic over the fate of Poland. This follows a well-established apologetic of both left and right wing writers of portraying the Poles as innocent victims. This historical mythology ignores the merciless persecution by the Poles of all the ethnic minorities within their territories, not just the Germans, as well as their rejection of the pre-war peace offers by Hitler and the Poles own well-documented belligerence.

“Bloodlands” is not totally without merit. Snyder acknowledges Stalin’s mass murders but employs the standard ivory tower tactic of trying to minimize them. Thus, the great Ukrainian famine is downsized from the more probable seven to ten million victims to an alleged three million. The Jewish involvement in Communism is acknowledged but passed off as a reaction to “anti-Semitism”. The Balts are blamed for liquidating Jews as soon as the Germans invaded but at least the massacres of the retreating Jewish NKVD commissars are mentioned too. Timothy Snyder honestly acknowledges the great liars on behalf of Communism like the journalists Walter Duranty and Louis Fischer. Still, he seems to feel that somehow the Jews were the main victims of the “bloodlands” of Eastern Europe. Perhaps this is implicit, unconscious racism which holds that Jewish suffering is worse than anybody else’s suffering; perhaps it is a reluctance to delve more deeply into the behavior of the Jewish commissars. In short, Timothy Snyder has done a half-way job with the facts. He cannot be accused of whitewashing the facts completely but as a genuine attempt to get behind the real issues of Eastern Europe between two world wars, his work is pseudo-revisionist in the most pejorative sense.

THE SURE TEST

Anyone who doubts that Jews run the United States should apply a simple test. Try saying that Arab oil money runs the United States. You will not be fired from your job or be blacklisted in your career. Next, try saying that the Blacks own Congress and that Slavery is a hoax. You will be fired on the spot and wind up working at MacDonald’s because of an invisible “black” list. That is the simplest, surest test of who really runs the United States

Just ask Stephen Walt and J.J. Mearsheimer

http://www.theoccidentalobserver.net/2010/12/projection-who-were-the-victims-in-the-ukraine/
The bullshit and lie lobby has added a mythical two milion to the mythical six million.

http://www.inconvenienthistory.com/archive/2010/volume_2/number_4/halfway_between_reality_and_myth.php

Note admission by Jewish author during the war about how one-half to two-thirds of the Jews in major Russian cities had been evacuated ahead of the advancing Germans. Note also admissions of how Jews were being used to repair railroad tracks and produce goods for the Wehrmacht.

THE SURE TEST

Anyone who doubts that Jews run the United States should apply a simple test. Try saying that Arab oil money runs the United States. You will not be fired from your job or be blacklisted in your career.

Next, try saying that “When I get on the plane, I got to tell you, if I see people who are in Muslim garb and I think, you know, they are identifying themselves first and foremost as Muslims, I get worried. I get nervous.”

You will be fired on the spot because of an invisible “black” list. That is the simplest, surest test of who really runs the United States

Just ask Juan Williams

I believe it was Jews who fired Juan Williams. They fired him for challenging the Jewish multicultural ideal.
My dick was between my ears, as usual, so I can’t figure out the obvious.

THEY WORK TOWARD ONE END

Opponents of Jewish conspiracy theories will often argue that major differences of opinion among Jews preclude any possibility of such a “conspiracy”. How, they ask, can there be any such conspiracy when Jews disagree about everything? But the argument is deceptive. Jews have many internal disagreements, surely. But on certain key issues Jews are as one in their thought. They all support the fiction of racial equality; they all support open borders and non-white immigration to the white west; they all believe that Jews should have equal rights in the Diaspora while pledging ultimate Jewish loyalty to Israel. And, most revealing of all, Jews oppose all these things in Israel. Arabs have no equality with Jews; immigration to Israel is for Jews only; the Arabs expelled in 1948 have no rights to their former country.

Jews will deny that they exercise any international power while simultaneously boasting of it. Thus, the Jews will denounce the Protocols a “myth” while a Barbara Lerner Specter in Sweden will confess that Jews are leading the drive for multi-culturalism in Europe and that they will be resented because of that “leading role”. The real proof of Jewish international power lies in the concept called the “common denominator”. If one observes certain trends in all nations and that those trends are constantly promoted in all instances by Jews, then the unavoidable conclusion is that there is a Jewish agenda at work. It is not difficult to establish that Jews have, in the past, pursued such agendas. The revolutions of 1848 in Europe were Jewish instigated in all countries. Revolutionary Marxism in Russia and Eastern Europe were entirely Jewish dominated from 1880-1950. Jews all over the world were in love with Soviet Russia so long as the Jewish commissars reigned. Jews worked, decade after decade, for a Jewish state in Palestine. They overcame both British reluctance and Arab opposition to achieve their end. In the process, they manipulated both the British Empire, the American government and the United Nations. Jews are very clearly capable of exercising coordinated power.

Anyone who has read Kevin MacDonald’s meticulously documented works knows that Jews in the United States have worked for decades to overthrow white racial dominance in the United States. This was true both in 1951-1952 during the debates on the McCarran Act and again in 1964-1965 when the 1921 Immigration Act was finally overthrown. From 1965 to present the United States have been subjected to ever increasing Third World population invasions. The responsibility for this racial invasion rests with people named Emmanuel Celler, Jacob Javits, Simon Rifkind, Charles Shumer, Elizabeth Holtzmann and many others. It was always the American Jewish Committee which filed amicus curiae, “friend of the court” briefs, with the judiciary to overturn so-called “racially discriminatory” statutes. During this same time period the Jewish National Fund in Israel was pursuing its purely discriminatory policy of leasing land to Jews on the specific condition that the Jew holding the lease would never sublease the land to any Arab. The “anti-discrimination” Jews in the United States voiced no objection.

Today, as Barbara Lerner Specter notes, Jews are driving Europe toward multi-culturalism over the objections of the white Europeans. They pursue the same objective in the Old World that they pursue in the New World. Why? Consistency of purpose is proof of an agenda. Why do Jews make war on white racial homogeneity? Do they do it to enhance their own power? Jews doubtless remember that a white, united country in Germany once seriously threatened their power. The best way of preventing this from happening again is to fragment the population. This is the only believable explanation. Jews cannot be taken seriously when they claim to be for the oppressed. They obviously do not care one whit for the welfare of the Palestinians they dispossessed.

Those who claim that there is no Jewish agenda in the world will not face facts. Not merely is the agenda there, it is ever more brazenly proclaimed. The white race is being systematically destroyed and the Jews are doing it. One need not be an apologist for Adolf Hitler to recognize this. In truth, the charge of “Nazi!” is used as an epithet to inhibit those who would speak plain truth. Love Der Fuehrer or damn him as you prefer, Dear Reader. But, under no circumstances, deny the fact that Jews are destroying the white race world wide. If you do, you sign your own death warrant.

THE UNION JACK OF ZIONIST GEORGE

Ladies and Gentlemen:

I thank you for inviting me to your conference. The Tea Party would be a wonderful thing but for one fact – you are fools. Did I shock you by calling you fools? Let me shock you some more – you are worse than fools – you are suckers. You have not noticed a simple fact. Your Tea Party is nothing but a front for Israel First Jews. These Jews tell you that they want to get the government off your back. They will do this by continuing to spend hundreds of billions of dollars they do not have on wars in Iraq, Afghanistan and soon Iran. They will borrow the money so long as they are able; when they can no longer borrow the Federal Reserve will buy the debt and hyper-inflate the currency. That is not a formula for getting the government off your back; it is a formula for bankrupting the United States fighting Israel’s wars.

The Tea Party should stand for America First; instead it stands for “Israel-uber-alles”. If you had not noticed, your Tea Party prompters are all shekel salesman for the Zionist state. Look at Glenn Beck. This man tells you that the United States and its way of life are threatened by “radical Islam”. He does not tell you that America is hated because of its support of the criminal state of Israel. He does not suggest that cutting off the countless billions the United States sends to Israel night be more cost effective than spending billions to fight Israel’s wars with American blood. He does not discuss the loss to the American Treasury of so-called “charitable contributions” by wealthy American Jews to finance Israel’s theft of Arab lands. The fake fiscal conservatism shall not be allowed to interfere with Zionist fundraising.

A Tea Party shekel salesman will talk endlessly about “American values”. But the values of the Founding Fathers were non-intervention in foreign affairs and good will to all nations. George Washington warned against the dangers of partiality toward a foreign favorite. John Quincy Adams, the son of John Adams, warned that if Americans ventured abroad in search of monsters to destroy, she would cease to be a beacon of liberty to the rest of the world. These Americans did not equate American ideology with Zionist ideology. They never believed that a foreign nation’s fight was America’s fight.

The Tea Party does not represent America or Americans. It represents Jews who want to fly Israel’s flag behind the American flag. It is a fake patriotism to lure Americans to their doom. Representative Ron Paul has refused to join the Tea Party because he, unlike you, ladies and gentlemen, recognizes the Tea Party for what it really is. If you want to save your country, ladies and gentlemen, you must grow up. You must see political reality for what it is. Here is an alien, cancerous force in your society which controls both sides of the political spectrum. It offers false alternatives so that nothing changes, no matter which party holds power. This force controls the Tea Party, as it controls everything else.

The Tea Party need not wear the swastika, for the swastika does not represent American values. But the Tea Party must recognize, as so many Americans once recognized, that Jews are not Americans either in spirit or in fact. Between the two world wars American Jews were agents of the Soviet Union; from 1948 to today they have been agents of the state of Israel. Until the Tea Party opposes the blue-and-white of Israel as the Union Jack of the Zionist George, nothing shall change in America. Therefore, the Tea Party has a simple alternative. Either identify the real target, or go barking into oblivion, like a pack of dogs chasing the wrong scent.

WAS PARIS 1919 THE END OF THE WHITE RACE?

The white race is on the decline world wide. Its birth rate is below replacement level; its industrial and economic strength is waning. How did it come to pass? It all began in 1914 when a disastrous world war shattered the foundations of the white world. Some will claim that World War Two was the true shattering of the foundations. But World War Two was, after all, merely the inevitable product of the First World War. World War One bled the white west dry in many ways. It wasted the best blood of Europe by the millions. The genetic loss was incalculable. Hundreds of thousands of young men died before they could generate any offspring. The British and the French paid a terrible price. The English population has been composed of working class drones ever since the blood baths of the Somme and Passchendale. The French had to import Negroes and Mulattos from their colonial empires because the native French could not replace the battlefield hecatombs. The foundations of empire overseas were also shattered. The subject peoples could witness the whites destroying themselves. They concluded that the time for revolution was ripe. Innumerable revolts broke out in India, Lebanon and Iraq. The revolts were temporarily crushed but the genie was out of the bottle.

Financially, the treasure expended on the conflict ended forever “La Belle Epoque”. The gold standard was overthrown and inflation has reigned ever since. The map of Europe was redrawn in a fashion guaranteed to produce revision by force and violence. The Second World War completed the process of decomposition. The remainders of the European colonial regimes were liquidated and Europe as the power center of world politics vanished from the map. The United States temporarily stepped into the shoes of Europe, 1945-1965, but now that the United States too, is an exhausted giant, economically bankrupt and suffering the ravages of racial invasion. The end of the west, 1914-1965, has been the story of fratricidal warfare and intervention in overseas conflicts. Today, the United States, having learned all the wrong lessons from two world wars, continues the process of dissolution by engaging in unaffordably expensive overseas wars. Its native white population suffers while charlatans far more criminal than the cartographers of Versailles redraw the global map.

DO JEWS DESERVE THE DEATH PENALTY?

Such a question as is posed by the title of this essay is usually considered too dangerous to even consider. But the question is not in the least facetious. Jews have been guilty of many offenses throughout the centuries, not the least of which is the attempted murder of the white race world wide. What makes that any less than a death penalty offense? The first degree murder of a single individual can get a criminal the death penalty in many jurisdictions. Is the attempted extermination of an entire race of humanity any less of a crime? The Jews are responsible for expelling an entire population in Palestine and stealing their country. How many Arabs would like to give the Jews the death penalty for that one? Jews brought Communism on the world and killed many millions in the process. Would it be too unkind to take the compensatory casualties out of their hide? Adolf Hitler obviously did not think so. For centuries the Jews gouged the common people as tax collectors by commission. Peasants paying 40% per annum on their loans did not hesitate to cut Jewish throats. The Roman Empire endured gigantic Jewish rebellions in which populations of entire cities were exterminated by Jewish massacres. The legions responded in kind.

Jews have quite a list of offenses to their credit. Since they continue to commit the same offenses over and over again, the case for clemency is extremely weak. Jews will object to collective Jewish responsibility for their sins. If Jews acted merely as individuals, that would be an acceptable argument. But Jews do not act as individuals; they act as an international nation. Jewish causes, such as support for Israel or the early Soviet Union, receive virtually unanimous Jewish support. Jews cannot act collectively then demand individual responsibility. That Jews do good things as well as bad is no excuse either. A murderer cannot escape punishment merely because his life has been otherwise exemplary.

The Jews have it coming, big time. Their crimes date back centuries. Today, they hide behind a gigantic lie of “gas chambers” and six million supposed deaths. And that is the final nail in their coffin. Even if they were to be forgiven all their other sins, the enforcement of this hoax is the conclusive proof that they have not changed and never will. The ruthless destruction of any who challenge the hoax is the best rebuttal to those who believe that the Jews deserve clemency. What clemency do the Jews have for those who challenge them?

John,

You are a sick, sick man.

The ruthless destruction of any who challenge the hoax

The sad state of your life has nothing to do with actual Jews, and everything to do with your obsession with Jews. You ruthlessly destroy yourself with this obsession, and that’s the truth.

Jews have been guilty of many offenses throughout the centuries, not the least of which is the attempted murder of the white race world wide

You just posted that whites killed themselves through “fratricidal warfare” and because their “birth rate is below replacement level” you dumbass.

I plead not guilty . . . Honky

IS ISRAEL AN OUTPOST OF WESTERN CIVILIZATION?

A Belgian politician is making a name for himself by linking anti-Moslem immigration with support for Israel. His pitch is that both Europeans and Israelis are threatened by Arabs and thus should unite against the common threat. This is very cagey and is doubtless a bid for Jewish support. The last thing this politician wants is to be labeled a white supremacist and a “Nazi”; therefore co-opt the Jews to his cause. The Belgian politico goes a step further by arguing that Israel is an outpost of western civilization in Arabia. This is complete nonsense, despite the popularity of the line. Theodore Herzl and his fellow Zionists desired a Jewish state in Palestine because they believed that there was no place for Jews in a Europe that was hostile to them. Hence, Jews should form their own state where they could flourish in isolation. That is hardly an expression of the compatibility of Judaism with western values, our clever Belgian politico notwithstanding. The response shall of course be made that such may have been true at one time but it is true no longer. Israel has evolved from its original conception and now represents a beacon of western civilization.

It is well to remember that these promises have been heard before. When the English first planted Zionism in Palestine, the argument was made that a Jewish state would protect the Suez Canal and safeguard imperial interests. A scant thirty years later, the “ally” was blowing up English soldiers and officials’ right and left as the British lion departed Palestine with its tail between its legs. The Zionist state that Belgian politicos describe as an outpost of western values was sold to English politicians as a means of weaning Jews away from Bolshevism. Give the Jews a state of their own and they would stop igniting the flames of Bolshevik revolution all over Europe. That is a strange curative indeed for a people representing the values of the west.

It would be idle to criticize anti-immigration politicos too severely. Their objective of removing racial aliens is a noble one. All politicians are snake oil salesmen. Their objective is not to write accurate history but to concoct a line that sells. If Mr. Belgian politician were logically consistent, he would support expelling both Arabs and Jews from Europe. After all, Khazars are as alien to the west as Muslims. But that would never do. Jews control both the money and the politicians. Therefore, do not mention that the Jews were the treasurers and tax collectors of medieval Spain or that the Jews expelled from Ferdinand and Isabella’s Spain became the advisors of the Ottoman Sultans in their war against Christendom. Jews and Arabs were once allies in the war against Christendom; now Jews and Christians are allies in the war against Arabs, “Believe It Or Not”.

I never argued that whites do not bear a large share of the blame for their own problems but that hardly let’s the Jews off the hook. As for the state of my life (which is quite good), what do you know about that other than what I choose to tell you?

http://www.codoh.com/gcgv/gcgvself.html

As for the state of my life (which is quite good), what do you know about that other than what I choose to tell you?

I know that you’ve spent the last year of your life preparing incessant anti Semitic rants in a dark corner of the internet for an audience of about 2 people.

That doesn’t exactly scream “healthy social life” or “mentally stable”

It is hardly the only place I post. Besides, if it is as insignificant as you claim, why are you paying attention?

P.S. Get rid of the photo. You are as ugly as you are stupid.

THE PRETENSE IS OVER

The “debate” on the historic Jewish role in Communism on the internet is pretty much over. Actually, there never was a debate, merely obfuscation by the other side. Presently, they have pretty much thrown in the towel. One Jewish scribe after another has conceded that Jews were disproportionately involved in all varieties of socialism. Even Milton Friedman, the economist, makes no bones about the Jewish fondness for revolutionary socialism. The matter is still not one for polite society but, when pressed, Jewish leaders and intellectuals will no longer deny it as they once did.

This newly found honesty may have come from the passing of Communism in Russia; it more probably comes from internet publishing and the disclosures of authors like Professor Kevin MacDonald and the late Alexander Solzhenitsyn, both of whom have written extensively on Jewish involvement in Marxism. Jewish Communism, in other words, was 100% true. All the shrieks of denial, the proclamations of offended virtue and the accusations of “How dare you?” were simply lies. These decades of lying about the real Jewish involvement in Communism are not without implications. Jews are covering up many things beside who unleashed Communism upon the world. They have yet to come clean on their “gas chamber” hoax or the real history of the state of Israel. But at least the pretense on Jewish Bolshevism is over.

http://www.thefreemanonline.org/columns/capitalism-and-the-jews/

Milton Friedman on Jewish connection with Communism/Socialism

I note that the university lecturer, Joseph Welch, is no longer responding. Matbe he should Email professor Friedman and tell him that he is all wet on Jews and Communism, just like John Thames.

NEW STANDARDS IN TERRORISM

In 1944 the Roosevelt administration staged a gigantic sedition trial in which approximately 35 defendants were prosecuted because of views which resembled, in certain respects, those of the German Nazis. The trial collapsed after many months because none of the defendants could be proved to have committed an overt act against American forces at war with the Germans. However, now that the Supreme Court has ruled that aid to terrorism need not involve an overt act, such as money or buying weapons, but merely moral and intellectual support, then anyone who says a kind word for Palestinians, doubts the reality of the “War on Terror”, espouses conspiracy theories or does historical research undermining media, ethnic or government myths can be labeled an “accomplice of terrorism”. The chilling effect on dissent is obvious.

Of course, all this is purely hypocritical. The same Zionist controlled judiciary that comes up with this nonsense is well acquainted with the history of the state of Israel. Justices Kagan and Ginsberg now that both Menachem Begin and Yitzhak Shamir, future Prime Ministers of the state of Israel, were wanted by the British Palestine Police Force for terrorist attacks against English soldiers and officials. And, speaking of lending “moral assistance” to terrorists, they undoubtedly remember Mr. Ben Hecht’s famous letter to the New York Herald Tribune in May 1947 in which he boasted that “every time a terrorist blows up a British train or building, the Jews of America make a little holiday in their hearts”. Ben Hecht’s famous play “A Flag Is Born” might have been construed as promoting terrorism, if an English judge were hearing the case. And then, the vast Zionist smuggling of arms and munitions to Palestine would qualify as aiding and abetting terrorism even under more old fashioned definitions. The Supreme Court shall ignore these precedents for “aiding and abetting terrorism” because concocted jurisprudence is merely a cover for more sinister objectives.

The Supreme Court does not practice Constitutional jurisprudence; it practices “ethnic-specific” jurisprudence. Terrorism is to be condoned and tolerated when it promotes Zionist-Jewish objectives; it is to be condemned when it can be used as a scapegoat for wider designs. “Is terrorism good (or bad) for the Jews” is the test.

THE PROSTITUTION OF THE MEDIA

Book after book appears proving that Joseph McCarthy was closer to the truth than he knew. The media pay no attention. Why? That is the key to the real issue lurking behind Joseph McCarthy. Communism is, after all, dead and no longer relevant. Yet the media, which made McCarthy’s name synonymous with character assassination, refuse to clear McCarthy’s name. They continue to insist that McCarthy was evil, despite the overwhelming confirmation of his charges. Clearly, something more is at stake here than the mere factual issue of whether or not there was Communist penetration of American society and government.

One issue lurking behind the purely factual question of Communism is the liberal “fronting” for Communism. America was full of liberal sympathizers for the workers paradise. They were very much its accessories and sycophants. That record of lying on behalf of Lenin’s and Stalin’s Russia is well documented and extremely damning. Since the record of pro-Communism could not be denied, the best evasive tactic was to scream that liberally inclined individuals were being persecuted for their beliefs. But there is a more fundamental reason for the media refusal to come clean on Joseph McCarthy. McCarthy’s anti-Communist campaign was implicitly an anti-Jewish campaign. The Communists he was exposing were disproportionately Jewish. The media, being Jewish controlled, will not forgive McCarthy this sin merely because McCarthy was factually accurate about Communists. The fact that McCarthy surrounded himself with anti-Communist Jews during his life time did not help him then; nor does it help his reputation with the media Jews now.

McCarthy was hated by the vast majority of America’s Jews during his lifetime; he remains hated by them still. That, in simple terms, is the real reason Joseph McCarthy has not been rehabilitated, despite the confirmation of his charges.

P.S. Get rid of the photo. You are as ugly as you are stupid.

Awe John. I already knew I wasn’t your type. I’m not 12 and I’m not from Spain.

It is hardly the only place I post.

Oh I know you post on other out dated blog posts as well.

You posted on an almost 5 year old feminist’s blog post of 2-23-06 on 12-18-10. I’m sure lots of people read that one.

You also posted on a blog created 10-23-09 on 9-6-2010 and went 40 some odd posts of screen scrolling raving lunacy without anyone saying anything at all to encourage you.

A Holocaust denial post of 4-30-07 you’re right in there on 11-21-08. You posted there for 2 years.

And that’s just the John Thames alias. I know you use and have used others. Of course, the only conclusions that can be drawn is that you are clearly the bane of people who forget to clean out their post archive and you’re batshit insane.

What it proves, pizza face, is that there are no rebuttals to my facts or logic. Why don’t you get your side kick, the long lost Joseph Welch, to do your postings for you?

there are no rebuttals to my facts or logic

John, you post on threads that any sane person would have considered dead for years. You’re not beating a dead horse. You’re beating the ground that a horse once walked on 3 years ago. That’s about as insane as it gets.

You couldn’t do a worse job of spreading your paranoid message of Jews and how they are going to get you for your opinions on Jews. Hell, you’d reach more people if you wrote it in Latin on the walls of ice caves in Antarctica. The only reason I’m here is so that one day, when you finally flip out and try to exact your own little endlosung I can say that I did everything in my power to keep your stupid racist ass occupied.

How I distribute my material (s well as how I amuse myself debating with idiots) is my business. As to the facts, you have no case and never did.

And one other thing, donkey face. When the truth of everything I’ve said comes out of the Russian archives, you will have a kosher turd sticking out of your mouth as you try to explain how dumb you’ve been all your life.

HATE SPEECH AND CRIME

The Jews are putting out a lot of propaganda, in the wake of the shooting of the Arizona Congresswoman, about how “hate speech” leads to unfortunate incidents. It is all nonsense. During the heyday of both the New Deal and Senator Joseph McCarthy, all kinds of political invective was flying. None of it led to the shooting either of Roosevelt or McCarthy. (There was one failed attempted shooting of Roosevelt in Miami. Huey Long in Louisiana was also shot.) Clearly, if high emotions and political invective led to shootings of politicians, 1933-1954 should have been the high water mark of political assassination in the United States.

In actual fact, the high water mark of political assassination in the United States came in 1890-1920 period in which many millions of Eastern European socialists (many of them Jews) entered the United States. An anarchist shot President McKinley; the anarchists Sacco and Vanzetti were similarly disposed toward violence. It would appear then, that a disposition toward violence has more to do with ethnic background and revolutionary ideology than political rhetoric. The same tendency was observable in Czarist Russia and pre-state Israel. Hessia Helfman, Hirsch Linkert, Vera Finger, Gershuni, Mordecai Bogrov and others all specialized in assassinating Czarist ministers. All were Jewish. The Jewess, Fanya Kaplan of the Social Revolutionary Party, shot and wounded Vladimir Lenin in the early 1920’s. In 1946-1948 terrorism flourished in revolutionary Palestine. Menachem Begin, Yitzhak Shamir, Dov Gruner, Nathan Yellin-Mor and others killed and maimed British soldiers and officials, amply aided by pro-terror Jews in America and the United Kingdom who shipped arms and munitions to the Jewish underground in Palestine. In Zionism’s earlier days, Ben Zvi, the colleague of David Ben-Gurion, ordered the assassination of Professor Jan De Hahn, an anti-Zionist Jew who had become inconvenient.

Abe Foxman of the ADL, who never misses an opportunity to ling terrorism with right wing extremism, shall not be issuing White Papers on forgotten facts. “Terrorism” is an elastic concept, malleable to political ends. This is why only certain kinds of terror merit condemnation. The other kind of terror is kept in reserve, to be employed when circumstances are right.

ARE THE JEWS WISING UP?

Students of the subject will recall that when the Balfour Declaration was first issued, numerous prominent English Jews objected to the declaration, fearing that it would raise the issue of Jewish dual loyalties, offend the Arabs of Palestine and create grave future problems for Jewry world wide. Those objections were disregarded at the time. Now, the chickens of Zionism have come home to roost. Israel’s atrocious mistreatment of the Palestinian Arabs is leading to anti-Semitism world wide. Some of the more intelligent Jews are starting to realize this. Mick Davis, a very wealthy and influential precious metals dealer in London, is one such. Davis has been increasingly critical of Israel’s behavior, arguing, in essence, that Israel is a rope around his neck. Davis perceives that Jews around the world, having supported Israel for decades, will one day be held accountable as the accessories and accomplices of the Zionist state’s crimes.

These arguments of Mick Davis have provoked a considerable backlash from the Zionists. He has been accused of being a traitor to Zionism and the Jewish people. Such a reaction is predictable but Mick Davis is entirely correct. Israel is getting the Jewish people in big trouble world wide. And it is only going to get worse. The Zionists are becoming more intransigent, not less. Their abuses grow daily. Whether it is launching invasions of Gaza or murdering passengers on hijacked relief ships, Israel has no regard for international law or world opinion. Mr. Netenyahu builds settlements on confiscated Palestinian land then piously demands bribes from Barack Obama to be (temporarily) dissuaded. Mick Davis is right. A noose is being wrapped around his neck by the state of Israel.

It would be nice if Mr. Davis’ fellow Jews would see the wisdom of his criticisms. However, it is unlikely that they will. Jews have too much emotional capital invested in Israel to back off it now. They created Israel in original sin by expelling its rightful inhabitants and they are no more cognizant of their sins now than they were in 1948. Mick Davis and other sensible Jews will eventually pay the price for the folly of Zionism, their well reasoned objections notwithstanding.

SALIVATING AT THE PROSPECT

The recent shooting of the Arizona Congresswoman sparked the media Jews into a frenzy of barking. Before any of the facts were known the media immediately characterized the assassin as a right wing lunatic. Now it appears that he was possibly Jewish and certainly no right winger. The particular facts are not the issue; the issue is the agenda showing its teeth before the facts were known. The Jews very much want to impose a “thought crimes” police state. Therefore, any random act of violence must be characterized as the product of an evil agenda that supposedly generates violence. That will be the alleged causal connection to justify the clamp down. When the clamp down comes the internet shall be shut down, right wingers, pro-Palestinians and Holocaust Deniers shall be incarcerated and executed. “Crime think” shall be everywhere.

“Crime think” is basically the crime of revealing every fact of history and politics that the Jews do not want known. These facts show the Jewish power hiding behind the New World Order. Jews do not fear random acts of violence. What they fear is nationally and racially organized violence designed to root out Jewish power. That will come when the average white understands who has really been tearing down his society for decades; hence, the need to demonize information by linking it to purposeless criminal acts.

A STILLNESS AT NUREMBERG

The treatment of Robert E. Lee and the Army of Virginia by Ulysses S. Grant at Appamatox forms an interesting comparison with the treatment of the Germans by the Nuremberg tribunal. Grant assured Lee that no surrendering Confederate soldier would be put on trial for treason. There would be no reprisals. Food and medical care would be available to any soldier needing it. No “war crimes” would be invented ex-post facto. In short, the war was over. Any reprisals against the South came from Thaddeus Stevens and the radical Republicans, not from Grant. Now, contrast this magnanimity from “butcher” Grant with the hypocrisy and brutality of the Allies at Nuremberg. Crimes that no one heard of were invented for the occasion, deeds were either crimes or not crimes depending on who committed them, the victors sat in judgment of their own charges and a vengeful ethnic minority orchestrated the entire macabre farce behind the scenes.

Ulysses S. Grant would never have done what the British, Americans, Soviet Russians, French and Jews did at Nuremberg. But then, Ulysses S. Grant expelled Jewish traders from the Union lines because they were profiting from the misery of war. He would never have appointed John Woods Short, a Brooklyn Jew, to hang Robert E. Lee, his West Point classmate, as a “war criminal”.

THE TWO RIGHT WINGS

There are two right wings in the United States. The first is the kosherized, Israel-uber-alles, God-fearing right that believes the capitalism that exports American jobs to India is the same system that made Andrew Carnegie wealthy. Then there is the politically aware right that knows the names of the Jewish commissars, laughs at fake “gas chambers” and knows that Khazars have no right to Arab Palestine. The two right wings do have points of similarity. They both want a white country and reduced government. They both oppose social engineering and reversal of traditional sex roles. But the one right wing knows from whence the poison is flowing; the other right wing is thoroughly confused.

The Jews have no fear of the one right wing because they own it. As Ron Paul says, the Tea Party has been taken over by the Israel First neo-cons. The other right wing concerns them. It may have little money but it has the facts straight. And it publishes relentlessly on the internet. This right wing cannot be co-opted. It can only be destroyed before the truth comes out. If Americans follow the one right wing, they are finished. If they follow the other right wing, they still have a slim chance.

GARFIELD GOES HOLOCAUST DENIAL

Odie the dumb dog is munching on his Zyklon B bone as Garfield explains “Holocaust Denial”.

“Listen, Odie. The Germans were using the Jews as labor for their war effort. The Jews were dying of typhus so the Germans deloused the camps with Zyklon B. That killed the bugs that were spreading the disease. Get It?”

“Woof.”

“No, you canine idiot. The crematory ovens were to burn the bodies of the Jews who died of disease. The rest of the Jews were deported into Russia to work for the Germans. They re-laid rail road lines and things like that.”

“Meow?”

“You’re a dog, remember? Stop changing the story like Holocaust survivors. Now, when the Germans lost the war, all the Jews who had been hiding out in Russia returned to play commissar in Eastern Europe. The rest of them invaded the Arabs in Palestine or went to America. Got it now?”

“Woof, woof!”

“What about Nuremberg, you say? You’re making progress, Odie. Good question. Nuremberg was run by Jews behind the scene. The evidence presented there was bogus. Documents were forged and testimonies were coerced.”

“Woof, woof, woof!”

“Very good, Odie. Now listen to this. The gas chambers show no traces of hydrogen cyanide residue. They are not properly sealed, ventilated or designed. They were simply morgues for holding diseased bodies waiting to be burned in the crematory ovens. That’s all.”

“Woof, woof, woof and more woof!”

“You graduated, Odie. Now take off the skull cap and put on your helmet. You’ve just been drafted into the legion of Holocaust Denial.”

So your saying your legion is full of a bunch of moron dogs?

Yep, that about sums up the legion of holocaust denial, and I swear that wasn’t me writing as john

Yeah. One day the master race will figure out how to make a Word press and Gravatar account.

Until that day lots of fun will be had.

Though I had begun to think that he took me up on my suggestion that he would have better success in ice caves in Antarctica. I guess I was foolish to think that he would stop posting here simply because it’s a 2 year old post that no one reads.

Even if the website went down he’d be out on the sidewalk scribbling anti-jewish comments with the crayons his hospital gives him

Odie Dogs:

Your Fuehrer has spoken.

Go meow!

LESSONS IN TERRORISM

Those who would be terrorists need to learn simple lessons. The first lesson is that a terrorist cannot function without the support of the population to which he appeals. If he does not have that support, then he will fail. Moreover, he will have no refuge. His own people will turn him in. Successful terrorists always have the backing of the population. The classic example is the Zionist terrorists of British Mandatory Palestine. The British could never apprehend the majority of the Zionist terrorists because the Jewish population would shelter them and refuse to turn them in. The entire Jewish population would smuggle arms and store munitions for the terrorists. The Jews in America and Europe would smuggle aid to the terrorists across international boundaries. The English could not cope with it. They could find no informers to help them. The Zionists, however, could find Jews working in the British Mandatory government who would inform them of English counter-measures. Every time the English would conduct an arms search or a sweep for terrorists, the Jews would have advance word.

Until white Americans are united behind white underground terrorists the same way that the Jews were united behind their underground terrorists, all attempts at terrorism shall fail.

http://ha-historion.blogspot.com/2010/02/orthodoxy-and-communism-part-i.html

From the Jewish History Channel. Please note the popularity of Communism among the rabbis and Hassidim as being consistent with ancient Jewish religious practices, particularly those of the Essenes.

Why is it that the white supremacist’s narrative always depicts white folks as a bunch of bumbling idiots?

They lost control of government,
the media
Religion
Society in general.

Hell John’s up there complaining that they don’t even breed right.

Man these guys are hard pressed to prove that white folks are the master race. They can’t seem to get anything right.

Some people manage to get everything wrong, like you, Fang. That is a far greater achievment. And what about those master race kikes in Israel?

http://www.suite101.com/content/jewish-communists-in-the-polish-security-forces-a306166

No Jews in Communism, hmm? Maybe you should forward to anus brain Welch.

I never would have guessed that all this time you included such moronic errors in your posts because you believe being wrong is a great achievement.

No wonder you’re a holocaust denier. How much more wrong could you get?

The error is all yours, moron.

KHAZAR CONSERVATISM

Ever since the collapse of the Soviet Union, the United States has been awash in what might be called “Khazar Conservatism”. Khazar Conservatism ardently desires that the United States fight Israel’s wars of Middle East Empire. Accordingly, a Khazar Conservative school of history has been created, which holds that the U.S. and Europe now face a menace called “Islamo-Fascism”, a continuation of the Ottoman Turkish invasions of Europe in the fourteenth through seventeenth centuries. An outstanding example of this Khazar Conservative history is the Zionist blog, “Gates of Vienna” which attempts to paint the present difficulties with Islam as another siege of 1683 threatening the very existence of the west.

Of course, this is all nonsense. Islam as a militant ideology on the march died several centuries ago. Ottoman Turkey was the “sick man of Europe” in World War One days. Its empire collapsed in the post-World War one peace settlements that are the real cause of present day difficulties. Before getting into that subject it is first necessary to examine certain facts of Islamic-Christian warfare that the Khazar Conservatives, such as Pamela Geller and David Horowitz, deliberately ignore. The Jews, during the heyday of Islamic-Christian warfare, were the allies of the Moslems. Moslem Spain, for seven hundred years, used the Jews as finance ministers and tax collectors to exploit the Christian population. Anti-Jewish riots broke out, again and again, as the population rebelled against Jewish-Moslem financial extortion. And indeed, it was the Jews who opened the gates of the cities of Visigothic Spain to the Arab general, Tarik. When the monarchs, Ferdinand and Isabella, expelled the Jews in 1492, the Jews fled to Ottoman Turkey, where they became the leading financiers and advisors to the Turkish Sultans. Donna Gracia Mendoza, Joseph Nasi and Solomon Ashkenazi, among others, counseled the Sultans on how to make war on, and take revenge against, the Christian states of Europe. These Jews had many contacts among their brethren still in Europe. They used these contacts to report to the Sultans on Christian military strength, naval dispositions and the like. These Jews believed that “Islamo-Fascism” (whatever that is) was a good thing.

Today, Khazar conservatives like Geller, Horowitz, Bernard Lewis and others, want whites to believe that the Islamic crusade against Europe which these Jews once supported, is a bad thing. The lack of credibility is obvious. The real source of present day tensions, as noted, is the disastrous carving up of the Middle East after World War One. This mistake, plus the planting of a Jewish state in Arab Palestine, is the cause of Islamic resentment against the west. The Khazar Conservatives assert, without proof, that Islam hates the west. Yet when the Arab nationalists began their revolt for independence against the Ottoman Sultan, Abdul Hamid, in the early twentieth century, they looked to the west, specifically the British Empire, for assistance. Many of these young Arab intellectuals were educated at Cambridge and Oxford before returning to their home lands. They brought with them English ideas of constitutional government and liberal democracy. When the revolt against the German allied Ottoman Turks began in 1915, the second year of the Great War, the Sheriff Hussein sought out the assistance of the much admired British Empire. He believed to the end of his life that the English were a great and honorable people whose word was to be trusted. When he found out otherwise, he blamed the betrayal on David Lloyd George, the Prime Minister who was indeed a Zionist agent.

The English military and colonial administration in mandatory Palestine was always opposed to the Balfour declaration which they rightly regarded as a betrayal of the Arabs who had been their battlefield comrades in the Great War. The Arab themselves had several “Arab Offices” in London, where former British soldiers and Palestine officials pleaded their case before the Zionist controlled officials in London and Parliament. Albert Hourani and Izzat Tanous were prominent in these efforts. Englishmen such as the MP, Edward Spears and the journalist, J.M.N. Jeffries, participated in these overtures. An American investigatory commission to Palestine, headed by Charles C. Crane and Henry King of Oberlin College, reported to President Woodrow Wilson in 1919 that the Arabs of Palestine-Syria were overwhelmingly opposed to the creation of a Jewish state in their country. They further opined that a Jewish state could only be created by force and that such a state would permanently inflame the Middle East. Their wise prognostications were ignored.

A further expression of support for the Arabs came from the English press lord, Alfred Harmsworth, Lord Northcliffe. As chief proprietor of the London Times, Northcliffe was planning a series of articles exposing Zionist ambitions in the Holy Land. He was probably kidnapped and murdered by Zionists in Paris, using the excuse of increasing insanity. As these examples show, there never was any inherent conflict between Islam and the west. Many efforts were made for Islamic-European rapprochement, only to be thwarted by Zionist intrigue. That was the problem in Lord Northcliffe’s day; it remains the problem today.

THE PSEUDO-PATRIOTISM OF THE PSEUDO-CONSERVATIVES

One of the consequences of the switching of Jewish loyalties from the old Soviet Union to Israel has been the rise of revisionist anti-Communism. Revisionist anti-Communism is the digging out of the historical closet all the facts that show McCarthy, HUAC and the Permanent investigations Subcommittee of the Senate Judiciary Committee were right. Why is it now permissible to talk about facts that were denounced as “character assassination” decades ago? Some will say – it is the emergence of new information. New information there is, surely. But that is not the real explanation. The real explanation is that the Jewish agenda has changed. In the days of Jewish Communism Jews had to deny – at all costs – that there were any Communists in the government or Hollywood. Why? Because the Communists being exposed were overwhelmingly Jewish. Now that Communism has fallen and the state of Israel is the “only democracy in the Middle East”, the Jews have a different strategy. They wish to convince Americans that there is a great evil that threatens them – an evil called “Islamo-Fascism”. This evil represents an internal security threat – the same internal security threat that McCarthy was fighting! Therefore, resurrect McCarthy, pronounce “Islamo-Fascism” the new Communism and demonize anti-Zionist conservatives and pro-Palestinian liberals as the new Alger Hisses.

This is laughable beyond description when one considers that the American government, Hollywood and the media are permeated at all levels with Israel First Jewish traitors. It is hard to believe that any thinking mind could actually believe such nonsense. But the internet is full of websites and blogs taking this transparent propaganda seriously. If Americans had any historical knowledge they could not fall for such nonsense. Jews have always subscribed to two ideologies – Communism or Zionism (sometimes both). They have always been divided between the two ideologies. Joseph Stalin’s anti-Jewish campaign in the Soviet Union post-1950 and the rise of the state of Israel in 1948 caused a seismic shift in Jewish loyalties. Many of the new Jewish supporters of Israel retained their Marxist, extreme leftist politics; others were supporters of Vladimir Jabotinsky’s Revisionist Zionists (the ideological forebears of Israel’s Likud and America’s neo-conservatives). Now that the Jewish Communist past has been forgotten, the false patriots of neo-conservatism find it useful to resurrect the Senator they worked so hard to destroy.

ADOLESCENTS OF THE INTELLECT

One of the benefits of living in a democracy is that any fool can have an opinion (unless it is an opinion of which Jews disapprove, in which case the penalty is instant career destruction). Thus, the internet blogs overflow with ignoramuses, pontificating on subjects they have never studied. They will deny the facts on Jewish commissars, tell you that the Moslems are out to conquer the world because they heard on the TV set, proclaim that the blacks in darkest Africa are the equal of whites and that you are an evil racist if you do not believe it or assert that Palestine was an empty desert before the Zionists came. They have never read a book on anything they presume to discuss or spent an hour in a research library but they know all about it regardless.

Their ignorance is invincible. They huff and puff with self-righteous indignation if you point out any of the documented facts they deny. Thus, they will call you an “anti-Semite”, a “Holocaust Denier”, a “bigot”, a “hater”, a “distorter of facts”, a “pseudo-historian” and every other epithet they can hurl against you. They hiss like the vampire at the sign of the cross. But when it comes to refutation, they offer Nuremberg forgeries, Glen Beck and Rush Limbaugh commentaries and History Channel specials. The general rule is that they do not want to hear anything that contradicts their pre-conceived notions. If you prove them wrong, they hate you all the more. The internet blogs overflow with such minds. These are the people who go to the polls and elect the same charlatans who lie to them, again and again. These are the people who never wise up and who would scream like bawling brats if they were forced to wise up.

Debating with such types us entertaining, but futile. They are adolescents of the intellect.

NOT SO IDLE THREATS

A Jewess lawyer has sued President Jimmy Carter for having defamed Israel in his new book, “Palestine: Peace, Not Apartheid”. The ex-president and his publisher, Simon and Schuster, are accused of perpetrating fraud against the Zionist state by misrepresenting facts and encouraging anti-Israeli actions. The lawsuit has no merit and shall of course be thrown out. That is a given. But what is fascinating is the brazen mindset involved. Israel was founded on fraud. The early Zionists, asserted, again and again, that they had no intention of creating a Jewish state at the expense of the Arabs. The Balfour Declaration itself eschewed the use of the word state. Nahum Sokolow, the famous Zionist leader, asserted in the introduction of his two volume “History of Zionism” that “it was never the intention of Zionism to establish a Jewish state in Palestine”. Max Nordau admitted that the term “Heimstaat” (German for “national home”) was intended “to deceive by its mildness until such time as we were ready to announce our real aim”. How can a movement founded on fraud and deception possibly accuse anyone else of fraud and deception against Israel?

As already said, the lawsuit is meaningless. What is meaningful is the increasing arrogance of these people. A man in Australia was just sentenced to three years in prison for insulting a Jew with harsh language. Dissidents all over the world are being sent to prison for questioning the mythical “gas chambers” of Adolf Hitler. Clearly, an evil pattern is emerging. Back in the 1940’s an American rabbi wrote that Jews needed to “fill the prisons with anti-Semitic gangsters”. It was an idle threat in 1944. It is an idle threat no longer.

THE REAL THREAT TO YOUR CIVIL LIBERTIES

There is much propaganda about the alleged threat of “Islamo-Fascism” these days. But it is the people screaming about Islamo-Fascism who are the real threat to your civil liberties. These people want you to fight and die on behalf of Israel. Their propaganda about the “War of the Worlds” between the West and Islam is on a par with the propaganda of the British Empire about the evil German “Huns” planning to do the same thing. These people are Israel First Jews and their sycophants. These Jews control the Congress and drive from public office any who refuse to give Israel anything it wants. They destroy the careers of any who dare to speak out publicly against the state of Israel or the Jews. Rick Sanchez, Helen Thomas, Oliver Stone and Mel Gibson are among those who have felt the wrath of Zionism. These Jews, who yap about the dangers of Islamo-Fascism, have passed laws against questioning the myth of the Nazi extermination of the Jews. Throughout Canada and Europe dissidents by the dozen have been imprisoned for questioning the eternal verities of the Nuremberg Trial. Moslem Imams are not yet throwing Americans into jail for swallowing hook, line and sinker the “truths” of America-Israel-Public Affairs Committee.

There can be no doubt that Islam is a harsh, intolerant and war like religion. But that can be no excuse for provoking an unnecessary war with an equally intolerant, militant, aggressive Zionism which has never recognized the right of the Palestinians to their land. In all the propaganda about the evils of Islam, there is never the slightest reference to the amazingly intolerant statements of fanatical Zionism. Thus, Mr. Vladimir Jabotinsky is never quoted on the TV set. “Zionism is a colonizing adventure and it stands or falls on the question of armed force. “ “It is important to speak Hebrew but it is more important to shoot.” The late rabbi Meir Kahane stated that “the Arabs are mad dogs who must be driven from Israel.” The followers of Baruch Goldstein, who shot down forty Arabs at prayer in a mosque, glorified the deed by saying: “He was the sweetest Jew who ever lived”, “We don’t think he killed enough but it was a good start”, “a thousand dead Jews are not worth a live Jews fingernail”, etc. Intolerance and fanaticism are to be charged against the Arabs, not against the Chosen People of Karl Marx.

AESOP’S ARAB TALES

A ferocious Arab lion is screaming in agony over a Zionist thorn called “Israel” in its paw. Along comes kindly, helpful Uncle Sam, who pulls the Zionist thorn out. The ferocious Arab lion turns into a happily meowing, contented kitten. Isn’t politics simple?

THE NEW BATTLE OF LEPANTO

When the old League of Nations first proposed a mandate over Palestine many Arab leaders thought awarding the mandate to freedom loving Americans would be better than awarding it to the imperialistic British. In those days American prestige was very high in the Arab world. The evil people of Islam had no thought of conquering the world in those days; they were more concerned with preventing the conquest of Palestine by the Zionists instead. One famous American, Charles Crane, was affectionately named “Harun al-Rashid”, after the famous Caliph, for his services in writing a report opposing the creation of a Jewish state in Arab Palestine. Americans were welcome and admired throughout the Arabian peninsula.

No one in those days had ever heard of a slumbering Islamic conspiracy to conquer the world. That was supposedly an Imperial German plot. The same Turks who had penetrated Eastern Europe in 1526 and 1683 had just been defeated and their “Islamo-Fascist” empire partitioned. Just how were Palestine, Trans-Jordan, Lebanon, Iraq and Syria to conquer the world when Sykes-Picot had just conquered them? The ringleaders of the vast Islamic conspiracy revolted against the British Empire in Palestine in 1920, 1921, 1929 and 1936-1939 but could not dislodge the Raj. They had not yet learned to hijack jet airliners, steer them through sleeping air defense systems and fly with pin point accuracy into two trade centers that were blown up from within. They wrote impassioned position papers demanding the repeal of the Balfour Declaration but got nowhere until Jewish thugs persuaded the British by more basic methods in 1946-1948.

The vast Islamic conspiracy to rule the world was in its infancy in those days. But all that has changed. The impotent Arabs of 1917-1948 easily defeated the American Army twice in Iraq, they go from victory to victory in Afghanistan and terrorize American soldiers with their long range firepower. Their scimitars cannot wait to disembark at Ellis Island as Jews fear for their heads. Auda Abu-Tay and Thomas Edward Lawrence overrun AIPAC with a cavalry charge and are massacring Israeli lobbyists on the floor of the Senate. Everyone can see this as they as they listen to Katie Couric describe the carnage. It is the “War of the Worlds” as broadcast by Sarnoff, Polinsky and Goldensen.

Do not laugh, Dear Reader. This, in all seriousness, is what you are asked to believe. Do not read the historical facts, read the script. Do not doubt Jeff Zucker, Mortimer Zuckerman and Rupert Murdoch. If you do, you are an anti-Semite. Man the barricades, for the new battle of Lepanto is about to sail past the American fleet in the Persian Gulf.

They huff and puff with self-righteous indignation if you point out any of the documented facts they deny. Thus, they will call you an “anti-Semite”, a “Holocaust Denier”, a “bigot”, a “hater”, a “distorter of facts”, a “pseudo-historian” and every other epithet they can hurl against you

Anti-semite noun 1. a dope. 2. someone who says this: “The Jews have it coming, big time. Their crimes date back centuries.”

Holocaust Denier noun 1. an idiot. 2. Someone who says this: “gaskammer does not translate gas chamber. It was probably nothing more than a testing device for gas traces after a delousing operation”

Bigot noun 1. a loser. 2. someone who says this: Whenever blacks are freed from white rule they relapse into the jungle. Everyone knows why. . . Blacks know perfectly that defective black genes, not white racism, is the cause of their problems.

Hater noun 1. a lonely guy in a trailer who goes to the local library for free internet. 2. someone who says this: “The point, since you seem incapable of grasping it, is that I really don’t like you Fangfuck, or your colleagues.”

Distorter of Facts noun 1. a high school dropout. 2. someone who says this: “Transjordan lacked an outlet to the sea.”

Pseudo-historian noun 1. a Hitler lover. 2. someone who says this: “President Johnson resigned from the Senate Whip to become the “go-nowhere vice president” and that “the first income tax was passed after WW1 and “the Titanic investigation ignored the lack of lifeboats and “the JNF owns a majority of the land of Israel.”

Ronnie is back to his usual irrelevancies. Nothing ever changes.

SHABBATAI ZEVI REMEMBERED

The Jews pose as exemplars of rationality and progress. But many episodes in their history prove otherwise. One was the great revolt against Rome, a suicidal endeavor if ever there were one. But an even better example of the Jewish insanity hiding beneath the veneer of rationality was the 17th century Messiah, Shabbatai Zevi. Zevi claimed to be the proverbial Messiah, come to lead the Jews to the Promised Land. He generated wild enthusiasm among all the Jews of Europe. In every country in which he appeared, seemingly rational Jews, men of worth and influence, abandoned their businesses and positions to follow Zevi, the Messiah, back to Palestine. The effect was hypnotic. None of these Jews asked themselves how Zevi would wrest Palestine from the hands of the obdurate Ottoman Sultan. It mattered not. Thousands upon thousands of Jews trekked to Turkey. The newspapers of the day commented savagely and sarcastically on the insanity of the Jews. The sheer lunacy of Zevi’s “Return to Zion” provoked merciless mirth from Christian Europe.

Shabbatai Zevi’s expedition reached a predictable end. When the “King of the Jews” met the Sultan, the Sultan proposed to test both the sincerity and the immortality of his new guest. The Sultan proposed to shoot arrows at Zevi to see if he was as divine as claimed. As an alternative, Zevi could convert to Islam. Zevi naturally chose the latter course. His crusade collapsed. The Christian Europeans had a field day. Jews all over Europe were mocked as psychopaths. Ancient Roman descriptions of Jews as worshippers of pigs were revived. The murderers of Christ were subjects of never ending satire. The Jews slunk back into their ghettos, mortified.

The Jews have not changed since Zevi’s day. They now have a false Messiah called the state of Israel. This donkey’s ass of a state succeeded with the Ottoman Sultan where Zevi failed. The British Army under Edmund Allenby and the British Foreign Office under Arthur James Balfour provided the miracle that the shaman Shabbatai could not. The Zionist zealots in the U.S. Congress, otherwise known as Republican neo-cons, want to set the entire Middle East ablaze for Israel’s benefit. One such is representative Steve Cohen; another is representative Eric Cantor. There are many others. When the United States collapses because of fighting Israel’s wars of Middle East empire, the Shabbatai Zevi’s of Zionism shall drag the Jews of America down with them. The Chosen People, who now ride high, shall be the horse’s asses of a failed faith. No one in the world will want them because of their rape of the Palestinians. They will be required to wear the swastika in public when the truth about their “gas chamber” hoax comes out. They will become, once again, what they have been throughout history, the outcasts of society, despised and loathed by all civilized peoples.

RATIONAL ANALYSIS

One of the big reasons for the backwardness of the Middle East is the low level of the intelligence of the people who live there. IQ in Egypt is not too high. It is obviously not a good idea to allow low IQ Moslems into Europe, just as it is not a good idea to allow low IQ Hispanics into the U.S. Moslems are unquestionably culturally and racially alien to white civilization and do not belong. Their religion is aggressive and intolerant. But they are not part of a world-wide conspiracy. Islam would still slumber peacefully were it not for the agitation of Zionism and political partition.

The Arab world is hopelessly divided. They could not unite at the time of the 1948 war. Their armies could not or would not unite against the Zionists; it hardly seems likely that they could unite against the west today. During the Arab revolt of World War One not all Arab tribes united against the Turks; some remained neutral, others fought on behalf of the Turks. In the 1950’s and 1960’s, Egypt and Syria were usually at loggerheads, even though temporarily aligned during the United Arab Republic (U.A.R.) of 1958-1961. Iran and Iraq were involved in a decade long war before the Iranian revolution of Ayatollah Kohmeini. The Hashemites of Jordan have remained stable far longer than the other Arab states in the region, largely thanks to excellent British tutelage and military training under Sir John Bagot Glubb. But even the Jordanians had their moment of confrontation against the extremists of the PLO during the Black Hand days of the early 1970’s.

In short, the Arabs are far more likely to continue fighting among themselves than they are to start marching on the west. The true Islamic threat to the west is the same threat posed by the Mexicans – massive immigration and higher birth rates. Everyone wants to talk about a phony threat – something called “Islamo-Fascism”. Islamo-Fascism is a concoction of political propaganda. It aims to make an intolerant religion the target when the real irritant is a Zionist intrusion backed by outside support. Had Moslems not been allowed into Europe by stupid immigration policies and the crime of Zionism not been planted in Palestine, Islam would be stewing in its own juice back in the Middle East where it belongs.

QUOTATIONS PROVE THE CASE

The proponents of the myth of Islamo-Fascism always like to pull out odious quotations from the Koran or other public statements of Moslem fundamentalists to establish their case. There is no doubt that the odious statements are true. But they would never, ever, dare to use the same technique against the former evil of Jewish Bolshevism. Why, that would be defaming God’s Chosen People for the sins of Jewish revolutionaries! It would be worse than quoting Dr. Joseph Goebbels. It would be possible to come up with hundreds of juicy quotations but let’s just use a few.

“…Millions of Jewish youths all over Eastern Europe…turned to Communism…”

Zionews (New York: New Zionist Organization, June 30, 1941, p.2 111/18)

“Up to 50% (of the Jews in the Soviet Union) are engaged as officials, clerks and in the intellectual professions. In the totalitarian system the Jew, instead of being engaged in trade and business, has been the official, the employee of the State.”

Kurt Blumenfeld in Jewish Frontier (New York) January 1942, p.9

“Since its very inception, the Communist Party has made strenuous efforts to win members among Jews.”

Dr. Alexander S. Kohanski, in Contemporary Jewish Record (New York: American Jewish Committee) September-October 1940, p.471

“The Communists are Jews, and Russia is being entirely administered by them. They are in every (Soviet) Government office, in every bureau, in every newspaper office.” (Moscow, October 27, 1923)

Claire Sheridan, in The New York World, December 13, 1923, p.13

Nazi propaganda! Nazi propaganda! So scream the Prophets of “Islamo-Fascism” who never tire of quoting Mohammed-bin-Whoever on how the West shall perish by the sword of Allah.

Ronnie:

The port of asshole is located on the backside of your Khazar butt. Try to remember not to defecate out your mouth.

ALICE ROSENBAUM

As Carlos Whitlock Porter has observed the real purpose of right wing Jewish agendas is to dupe whites into accepting left wing social agendas. A good example is the Objectivism of Alice Rosenbaum (Ayn Rand). Rosenbaum espoused two notions:

(1) that racism was an abysmal form of collectivism

and

(2) that an unborn child was merely potential rather than actual life.

Rosenbaum never offered any evidence for her assertion that all races were inherently equal in intellectual capacity. She never bothered to explain why blacks consistently lagged behind whites in school performance or why their crime rate was ten times as high. Indeed, she resorted to the typically Jewish tactic of analogizing any discussion of racial differences to Nazi anti-Semitism. Rosenbaum/Rand would never concede that whites, as a group, might have racial interests perfectly compatible with their individual interests. Indeed, Rand and her Objectivists were demanding the abolition of pro-white immigration laws in the 1960’s because those discriminated against individuals because of their race. Rosenbaum’s position on abortion was typically Talmudic. She argued that a fetus was merely potential, rather than actual life. She further argued that the convenience of the actual living being, the mother, took precedence over the developmental rights of the merely potential fetus. This argument was merely the standard Talmudic position. Per the Talmud, a fetus is considered a rodef, an aggressor, which invades the woman’s womb. She has the right to expel that invader if she does not want it. The fetus does not acquire nefesh, or human status, until seven days after birth. If it dies before the seven days have elapsed, it is not entitled to be buried as a human being. Naturally, Rand did not tell her readers the true origins of her supposedly profound philosophical views.

Alice Rosenbaum, who died in 1982, was also a fervent supporter of the Zionist state of Israel. Long before the rise of the Israeli revisionist historians, she put out all the standard Zionist myths about Israel – that it was an advanced technological society, that the Arabs were sand niggers, that Arabs were terrorists, that Palestine was an empty desert before the Jews came, etc. In short, the great apostle of “reason” was completely irrational when it came to facing facts on her real country. Alice Rosenbaum would never concede that American support for Israel was prejudicing American interests in the Middle East. Nor would she concede that there was anything to the dual loyalty charge that so concerned the anti-Zionist Jews of Lord Balfour’s day. Ayn Rand /Alice Rosenbaum was a typical Vladimir Jabotinsky Revisionist Zionist. Like Jabotinsky she was a fervent supporter of pure capitalism. But even more, she was a fervent apostle of a Zionist state. Jabotinsky was intellectually more honest than Rand/Rosenbaum. Writing in the 1920’s Jabotinsky admitted that the Arabs were not savages. They were civilized and long settled on the land. He admitted that they were deeply attached to their soil and would never surrender it unless they were confronted by an iron wall of bayonets that would destroy all hope.

Ayn Rand/Alice Rosenbaum was an outstanding example of a Jewish intellectual fraud using false premises and tortured dialectics to sell right wing Americans a bill of goods. Although her support of free market economics had something to be said for it, she was otherwise a Zionist charlatan. She deserves to be remembered, not as a great thinker, but as an exemplar and a paradigm of Jewish deception.

the real purpose of right wing Jewish agendas is to dupe whites

And, according to the white supremacists, the Jews have been kicking ass at this for centuries. So if we are to measure intellectual capacity as a function of how easily duped a group is, the white supremacists are loath to argue the supremacy of a group that is consistently duped by a supposed inferior group.

Doesn’t it seem odd to you that a self proclaimed supreme race can’t get its collective heads out its collective asses long enough to be in a position to stop blaming other races for its own inferiority?

Fang Stupid:

Why don’t you get your head out of your charming ass about fake “gas chambers” and a mythical “six million” before you preach to others about being duped? As to whites being a master race, it seems to me that they are presently utter fools, marching lemming like to their destruction.
Whites were not always so stupid about the Chosen. Up to the Second World War they had a pretty good grasp of the subject. The French philosophes of the Enlightenment, Diderot, D’holbach and especially Voltaire, said things about them that would make Adolf Hitler blush.

I believe that it is blacks, not whites, who consistently blame other races for their own failures. Once again, your thinking is off the mark.

Why don’t you get your head out of your charming ass about fake “gas chambers” and a mythical “six million”

Hey, I’m not the one who’s argument hinges on my friends all being a bunch of morons. That’s your argument, not mine.

myths about Israel – that it was an advanced technological society

Heheh you think Israel is not an advanced technological society?

The percentage of Israelis engaged in scientific and technological inquiry, and the amount spent on research and development in relation to gross domestic product, is amongst the highest in the world.

Israel ranks fourth in the world in scientific activity as measured by the number of scientific publications per million citizens.

Israel’s percentage of the total number of scientific articles published worldwide is almost 10 times higher than its percentage of the world’s population.

Israel has seven research universities, and they are ranked among the top 100 academic institutions in the world in scientific disciplines.

Israel is one of the world’s most prolific innovators in advanced technologies, and is widely seen second only to Silicon Valley as a high-tech cluster.

Besides, Ayn Rand was one of the most outspoken anti-communists of her age, a bitter critic of the Soviet Union, and testified as a friendly witness before the House Un-American Activities Committee.

Come now, Ron. Of course John was tricked by the tricky Jewess Ayn Rand. He’s white, remember? It’s like her job to trick dumb white guys like him. John Galt is just an elaborate double reverse inverted psyop designed to trick people into becoming communists so that Jews can loan them money at high interest. It’s all very simple. Too bad white folks are too dumb to “get” it.

Hell, according to John, they are now too stupid to even breed right.

Hows that breeding thing going for you John? Still at zero? Must be because all the white women are too stupid to realize that the Jews are wrong to elevate them to an equal status with men. If only they were smarter and realized that they are inferior to a man you might have a shot at propagating.

Oh well.

Hey, Ronnie:

And how much of that high powered technology did your Zionist genius friends steal from the US? Why don’t you ask Jonathan Pollard. He might be able to clue you in. And speaking of all those nuclear weapons that Israel does not have. Did you ever read about how Mr. Shapiro helped his Zionist buddies to some unauthorized plutonium from that NUMEC plant in Pennsylvania back in 1965? Or that kidnapped Norwegian uranium ore ship in 1972?

Fang Suck:

Recite for me the Othodox refrain:

“Blessed be thou who hast not made me a goy or a woman.”

Then read how a minyan or quorum cannot be reached if ten Jewish males are not present. (Women don’t qualify in the Orthodox scheme.)

Stupid, lying assholes. I never wrote that Alice Rosenbaum was a Communist. I wrote that she was a Jabotinsky Zionist. Don’t reproduce, Fang. The world has too many fools already. As for Ronnie, he fucks frogs.

http://www.veteranstoday.com/2010/12/05/paul-balles-chickens-come-home-to-roost/

Well, ain’t Israel wonderful? Keep on sucking Jew cock, Ronnie, while your favorite frog fucks you up the ass.

I’m sorry, John I don’t follow. You think that women are inferior because they can’t pray with you and 9 other guys? Does that mean you’re Jewish? Is that what you are arguing?

You must be one confused racist.

Fang stupid,

The answer’s clear to anyone who isn’t a complete idiot.

1. Jews are smarter then white people. They trick us all the time, and I mean all the time.

2. Jews are right about women being inferior. They know a women’s place and they know how to keep her there.

3. Jews try and trick us into thinking that women are equal so that women will refuse to mate with dumb white guys.

4. Jews make it illegal to have sex with children, thus denying us the only group that white guys are smart enough to trick into having sex.

5. I wish I was a Jew so that I could have sex and oppress women.

And how much of that high powered technology did your Zionist genius friends steal from the US?

None, but that’s besides the point.

You said there was a myth about Israel, that it was an advanced technological society and it is no myth, Israel is a hightech superpower. Besides:

How can Israel steal its high ranking in the number of scientific publications per million citizens from the US?

How can Israel’s extremely high percentage of scientific articles be stolen from the US?

24% of Israel’s workforce holds university degrees, third highest in the industrialized world – did they all steal their degrees from the US?

Israel has the highest number of scientists and technicians in the workforce, 145 per 10,000, did they steal them from the US?

How can Israel steal 7 of the world’s best scientific research universities from the US?

The implication in your question:

how much of that high powered technology did your Zionist genius friends steal from the US

is just an admission that Israel is an advanced technological society.

Y’all aint learned nufin’ over these past few years. Y’all coulda better used yer time studyin’ fer that danged GED test bubba!

Actually, Ronnie, quite a few of those Jewish scientific geniuses migrated to Israel from the former Soviet Union, where Jews were the leading scientific workers of the former workers paradise. (I guess that proves that Communism is good for science. At least, that is what Robert Oppenheimer, Albert Einstein, Steve Nelson/Mesharosh, Theodre Hall/Hertzberg and all those other Jewish physicist geniuses who studied at Karl Marx’s tippy-toes thought, too.) These scientific socialist Jews found that stealing American nuclear technology was easier than developing it back in the lab back home in Moscow. I wonder why.

As for Fang, he has his brain on backwards, as usual. He never has anything interesting to say either, other than imputing to me his fascination with ten year old assholes.

http://www.amazon.com/Spy-Trade-Israels-Undermines-Americas/dp/0976443716

So Israel steals “none” of its technology, does it? Is that so, Ronnie? Bullshit.

http://www.davidduke.com/general/israeli-economy-for-beginners_22644.html#more-22644

Read from one of your own, Ronnie, on the glories of the Zionist economy. Kosher crime sure pays.

I’m sorry, did you just say that Oppenheimer stole American nuclear technology?

Is that what you just said?

Man it’s a good thing you don’t know how to breed.

Actually, Ronnie, quite a few of those Jewish scientific geniuses migrated to Israel from the former Soviet Union…

Great, and thanks for disproving your own “myth” about Israel not being an advanced technological society

Nice work goober!

Mr. Dimwit:

Oppenheimer was a Jewish Communist working for the Soviet Union, as recent disclosures from the former Soviet archives have demonstrated. Instead of following the essential pont, you prefer to argue over whether he was American or Russian. How typically Talmudic.

Apparently you cannot detect saercasm when you read it, Ronnie. And you still have not addressed the point – If Jews are such geniuses, why do they have to steal what they cannot produce on their own from others? People who have the ability don’t need to steal other people’s ides, dumb shit.

http://www.davidduke.com/general/israeli-espionage-in-america-a-national-security-scandal_22677.html#more-22677

Gee, look who is running the show.

PROTOCOLS OF POLITE SPEECH

Cass Sunstein, the Jewish Marxist “constitutional law” professor who was appointed by Barack Obama as a sort of roving minister at large in the government bureaucracy, has recommended censoring “rumors” on the internet. A rumor, of course, is any verifiable fact which conflicts with the 09/11 story or any other official lie the government puts out. Commissar Sunstein opines that such “rumors” are unnecessarily agitating the populace. They instill distrust in the gullible and create anti-government sentiment. Such “rumors” must be suppressed. Or, at a minimum, those who spread such rumors must abide by a “fairness doctrine”. They must post official government rebuttals of their position so that the free thinking may have “both sides” of the issue.

Such novel concepts are what one would expect from a great Jewish mind. Alan Dershowitz style intellects proliferate. But wait. Such concepts have a strangely familiar sound. Did not an alleged Zionist forgery advocate a similar procedure? Do not the mysterious “Protocols of Zion” recommend shutting the press down at the right moment? Do they not say that the excuse given shall be that the public mind is being agitated unnecessarily? Why indeed, they say precisely that. Does Cass Sunstein speak as the “great thinker” he undoubtedly is, or does he speak as a well-trained lackey of a more sinister force? Cass Sunstein would undoubtedly pooh-pooh such considerations as ridiculously conspiratorial. Like hordes of other Jews who earn their appointments to high government positions, Cass Sunstein belongs to the “Brotherhood of the Blood”. (It is not run by Glenn Ford.) The College of Mount Zion exercises no secret subterranean influence on government policy. Uncanny resemblances are coincidental. Only anti-Semitic little old ladies preaching to Nero Wolfe pedigreed TV talk hosts believe otherwise. THE

Cass Sunstein represents no brotherhood and frightens only middle class housewives fearful of losing respectability. The “Protocols of Polite Speech” are his only agenda, Rosemary.

THE POALE-ZION OF BOLSHEVIK RUSSIA

“National Communism” would be a strange term to American ears. Yet, as Baruch Gurevitz shows in his book, “National Communism in the Soviet Union, 1918-1928”, it was the concept that integrated Poale-Zion (the World-Wide Union of Jewish Workers) with the Soviet Union and its Bolshevik leadership. The Poale-Zion exemplified the efforts of the Bolsheviks to integrate Zionism and the concepts of Jewish nationality with the ideals of the Communist revolution. Zionism was, as Lenin had argued, inherently incompatible with Marxism. Marxism was to integrate the Jews with other workers and thus abolish the “paper nationality” of Jewry. Moreover, Zionism was a reactionary bourgeois ideology. But the practical reality was that Poale-Zion represented a huge mass of Jews all over the world who wanted international recognition of the “right” of the Jews to immigrate to Palestine and set up a Soviet Republic there. This “right” the Bolsheviks would never concede for the obvious reason that it would threaten the authority of the Bolshevik state. Neither could the Bolsheviks ignore the strong Zionist sentiments of large numbers of Jewish Communists.

The Jewish Section of the Party, the Evsektsiia, was therefore put in charge of pushing Poale-Zion toward Communist universalism as far as possible, while simultaneously indulging Zionism as a somewhat acceptable offshoot of Marxism. Poale-Zion split into its right and left wings in 1920, with the right advocating Democratic Socialism and the left wing continuing to espouse world revolution. Poale-Zion had the interesting idea that a socialist Palestine should exist in federated form with Jews from various countries having their own “national autonomy” (Russian, German, Polish, etc.) within the framework of a Palestinian-Soviet state. This was remarkably similar to the evolving nationalities system in Soviet Russia where the various minorities in the former Czarist Empire were organized in similar fashion. Thus, there were the Ukrainian Socialist Republic, the Belorussian Socialist Republic, etc. Poale-Zion was greatly feared by the British Mandatory Government in Palestine, who were aware of the Poale-Zion influence among the Jewish immigrants to Palestine. Poale-Zion also had a formal relationship with the British Socialist Labor Party and thus, influence within the government and the Colonial Office in London.

Poale-Zion also had strong links to the other rapidly coalescing revolutionary parties in Bolshevik Russia. It was on friendly terms with the Sejmists of the Jewish Socialist Workers Party (the S.E.R.P. of Chaim Zhitlovsky) which merged with the Zionist-Socialist Workers Party in May 1917 to form the United Jewish Socialist Workers Party. These parties were not as overt as the Poale-Zion in demanding a Jewish workers state in Palestine but were broadly sympathetic to its goals. As Gurevitz shows in his study, the Communist state up to 1928 was lukewarmedly sympathetic to Zionist aspirations. Zionism was officially heresy but heresy within the framework of a generally Marxist approach. Thus, the Evsektsiia and the heavily Jewish Communist bureaucracy could accommodate Poale-Zion, up to a point. Zionist projects could not override Communist ones but could be tolerated so long as they did not conflict with Bolshevism. Zionists living in the Communist agricultural colonies in the Crimea could visit mandatory Palestine and return. The relationship between Poale-Zion and the Communist Third International (the Comintern) was a complex one. Without going into the complexities of the various splits, the essential resolution was that the Comintern would use Pale-Zion to spread Bolshevik propaganda among the Palestinian workers (Arabs and Jews alike) while rejecting Poale-Zion’s demands for a Jewish state in Palestine.

The collapse of Poale-Zion in the Soviet Union was closely linked to the rise of Joseph Stalin and his plans for a Jewish Autonomous Region (JAR) in Siberia called Birobidzhan. Poale-Zion did, of course, support the idea of Jewish nationhood but rejected Birobidzhan because it would only be a homeland for the Jews of the Soviet Union, not of the world. (In the event, this proved to be not entirely accurate. Large numbers of Jews in America and Canada, fired by the idea, did migrate to Birobidzhan.) In 1928, upon the proclamation of the Birobidzhan scheme by the rising General Secretary of the Party, Joseph Stalin, the Soviet branch of Poale-Zion was shut down. Zionism, in any of its forms, was now unacceptable in the Communist paradise. Poale-Zion continued to exist in neighboring Poland, in England and America. But its existence as a viable political movement was over. Its membership served mainly as a reminder of the Marxist background of Zionism. That background was hardly irrelevant, as the subsequent migration of hundreds of thousands of Jewish Communists through the Balkans, 1945-1948, was to demonstrate.

And you still have not addressed the point

The point you made was Israel’s reputation as an advanced technological society was a myth. Not surprisingly, you were wrong.

And quit trying to hide your mistakes by burying them under multiple, long, irrational, jew hating comments that are off the topic of Israel being a technologically advanced country.

Ronnie Dumb Shit:

A country that gets its ideas through stealing them is not technologically advanced, period.

And as for “burying the point”. The sentence denying Israel’s reputation as an “advanced, technological society ” apeared within the context of an essay on Ayn Rand/Alice Rosenbaum. You employed your usual debating technique of trying to find an isolated sentence to quarrel with rather than refuting the essay as a whole. So the whole “issue”, as you term it, only became an issue at all because you want to make something out of nothing. It’s tather like your nonsense of dealing with an essay on the post-WW1 partion of Arabia by yapping endlessly on the location of a port. Or trying to refute my essay on the history of Zionism by arguing over whether Theodore Herzl wrote “Jewish problem” or something equivalent.

You’re a bullshit man, Ronnie. And since your Khazar ass loves Israel so much, why don’t you go live there, permanently? After all, those Jewish geniuses created a paradise in the desert by building over the Arab villages already there – after God’s Chosen demolished them.

The “lengthy, irrational, Jew hating essays” to which you refer are nothing more than the documented truth that all the charges that Jews routinely deny are nothing more than the documented facts, as proven by their reference works. It must really gripe your ass that I can prove you, and every other Jew, a liar so easily.

Keep on screaming.

You employed your usual debating technique of trying to find an isolated sentence to quarrel with rather than refuting the essay as a whole

I don’t pick out isolated sentences to quarrel with, I just highlight the glaring mistakes of facts that I know enough about off the top of my head to comment on.

Facts btw anyone with half a brain would know hehehehe except maybe a dumb racist jew-hater like you of course. Then again, ascribing to you half a brain may be too generous!

Your dumb essays are always based on lies, half-truths, misrepresentations and faulty sources – like radio islam, stormfront, david duck etc. – that the sum of its parts destroys the whole.

Now go study for yer GED dummy

Ronnie Turkey Shit:

You could not pass a course in third grade logic – you are much too stupid. My essays are based soley and exclusively on what Jewish scholars admit in their own reference works; they are not based on Stormfont, Radio Islam and other sources I never use (and before you reference my “Fraud of Zionism” essay posted on Radio Islam, it is my original creation to be found on many other websites as well). You can argue all you want about whether your fellow kikes are technological genuises or whether they are just good at copying from America, stealing from us or whatever. But when it comes to refuting my analysis of Poale-Zion, my studies of Mr.Vladimir Jabotinsky or my heavy documentation of Jewish involvement in Communism, you are as silent as your fellow asshole brain, Joseph Welch, who had nothing further to say when I plastered him with one documented quote after another from Jonathan Frankel’s “Dark Times, Dire Consequences: Jews and Communism”. He slunk silently away. Unfortunately, you are too dumb to know when to shut up.

Allright you turd shit, cocksucking little kike. We are going to have a little fun. Here is, once again, the essay with which I taunted Mr. Joseph Welch. Now the gauntlet is thrown down for you. You will have to address the facts. You do not get to bullshit about whether the Wezmann Scientific Institute is located in Jerusalem or Tel Aviv or whether the the southwest or souteast wing of the King David Hotel was blown off or when the income tax was passed or any of the other obiter dicta irrelevancies by which you habitually seek to confuse issues. No, you little penis faced Khazar limp dick. You have to rebut the essay with something logical, minimum two pages in length, typed, with appropriate references to prove me wrong. That is the “Professor Thames” test – and I guarantee you right now that you are going to flunk, you yeshiva school scumbag.

LECTURER OF TRUTH

A Mr. Joseph Welch of Counterknowledge.com has frequently accused this writer of distorting historical facts, in particular of falsely describing Communism as a Jewish movement. He accuses this writer of lacking proper academic credentials and of not having his writings subjected to “peer review. He then concludes that the Jewish Communist charge is bogus and that those who advocate it are intellectual charlatans, not to be listened to. Mr. Welch is inordinately proud of his own credentials as a university lecturer. He therefore reasons that he possess a wisdom above that of those who merely reason from facts to sustainable conclusions. Thus, Joseph Welch flies the PhD. of stupidity as the flag of his own invincible ignorance.

When this writer posted excerpts from a State Department document entitled “The Power and Aims of International Jewry” Mr. Welch’s response was to deny the authenticity of the document. At the same time he was denouncing this writer for failure to do archival research, he was supremely unaware of an actual archival document bearing on the very topic he was denying, the connection of Jews with Communism. Homer Lea once wrote a book, “The Valor of Ignorance”. He was hardly thinking of Joseph Welch, although the appellation could hardly be better placed. Just to show how incredibly ignorant and uninformed Joseph Welch is, we shall quote in extenso from a volume entitled “Dark Times, Dire Consequences: Jews and Communism”, edited by Jonathan Frankel and Dan Diner and published in 2004 by Oxford University Press as part of the “Studies in Contemporary Jewry” series. This volume contains a wealth of information on just how deep and world wide the Jewish connection with Communism once was. We shall begin with the introduction on pp. 9-10.

“Beyond these questions involving empirical historiography, there remains the ethical issue of collective responsibility. Given that, at some times and in some places, Jews were disproportionately involved in the massive crimes committed by the Communist regimes in Europe (emphasis added), did they in the process morally ‘contaminate’ the Jewish people as a whole? Did they act solely as individuals whose origins happened to be Jewish or was there a linkage, however construable, between their Jewish extraction, their Communism, and their participation in atrocities?”

“If, for no other reason, this question cannot be avoided because the argument is so often made in Eastern Europe today (in Poland and Lithuania, for example) that the large number of Jews within the Soviet security agencies who took a leading role in the years 1939-1941 both in the deportation of hundreds of thousands of innocent victims to the deadly Siberian labor camps and in numerous executions – and, by so doing, opened the way to acts of vengeance visited on the Jewish people by their Gentile neighbors from the moment the Red Army was forced back by the Wehrmacht. If, for example, the entire Polish people is to be held in some way responsible for the Jedwabne massacre carried out by Polish villagers, does it follow that the Jewish people should share in the guilt incurred by the murderous acts of Jewish NKVD/MVD operatives?”

Let us examine these paragraphs closely. They admit the basic fact denied by university lecturer Joseph Welch. Jews were disproportionately involved in Communism – and there is indeed an issue of Jewish collective guilt. This is admitted by two world class Jewish scholars – but denied by their intellectual superior – university lecturer Joseph Welch. Now let us proceed to various choice quotations that document the Jewish involvement Joseph Welch denies. In his essay, “Jews and the Communist Movement in Interwar Poland” Jaff Schatz of the Institute for Jewish Culture, Lund writes, pp.20-21:

“As previously suggested, throughout the interwar period, Jews did constitute one important segment of the Communist movement. According to both Polish sources and Western estimates, the proportion of the Jews in the KPP was never lower than 22 per cent countrywide, reaching a peak of 35 per cent (in 1930). According to some available data, the level of Jewish members of the Communist movement then dropped to no more than 24 per cent for the remainder of the decade. Other data, however, indicate that Jewish involvement actually went up in the large cities; in Warsaw, for example, Jewish membership rose from 44 per cent in 1930 to more than 65 per cent in 1937. In the semi-autonomous KPZU and KPZB, the percentage of Jewish members was similar to that in the KKP. The number and proportion of Jewish members in the youth movements was even higher, ranging from 31 per cent to a high of 51 per cent.”

“Working on the assumption that Polish Jewish Communists constituted between a quarter and a third of the Communist movement during the 1930’s, the total of Polish Jewish Communists (including youth group members but excluding political prisoners) ranged between 5,000 and 8,400. If prisoners are included, the numbers range between 6,200 and 10,000. In addition, Jews comprised the overwhelming majority of the legal front organizations, the Polish-based International Organization for Help to the Revolutionaries (MOPR)…which collected money for and channeled assistance to imprisoned Communists. In 1932, out of 6,000 members of the MOPR, about 90% were Jews.”

“Perhaps even more significant was the Jewish representation among the Communist leadership. Although party authorities consciously strove to promote classically proletarian and ethnically Polish members to become leaders and party functionaries, Jews accounted for 54 per cent of the field leadership of the KPP in 1935 and 75 per cent of the party’s technika – those responsible for producing and distributing propaganda materials. Communists of Jewish origin also organized a majority of the seats on the Central Committees of both the…KPRP and the KPP.”

Here, once again, we have a clear factual rebuttal of university lecturer Joseph Welch, who trumpets his credentials to the world while ignoring readily available secondary source literature which proves him wrong. Mr. Welch needs less peer review and more old fashioned objectivity to temper his thinking. Now let us examine what Istvan Deak says in his essay “Jews and Communism: The Hungarian Case”. On p.38 he writes:

“Jews, or rather, persons of Jewish origin but not of the Jewish religious persuasion, occupied decisive positions in the Hungarian Communist Party and, in general, the Hungarian socialist movement. Moreover, because the Communist party was in power in Hungary for 133 days in 1919 and again, roughly, from 1947 to 1989, it is no exaggeration to say that political personalities of Jewish origin played a decisive role in 20th-century Hungary.”

“To take matters a step further, one can state with confidence that Jews held a near monopoly of political power in Hungary during the 133 days of the Soviet republic in 1919 and again from, roughly, 1947 to 1955, and then again from 1955 to the fall of 1956. Because nowhere else in Europe did persons of Jewish origin ever share in such large numbers in similar long-term dictatorial power, it is clear that Hungary’s was a unique situation…”

“The truth was that it was of very great consequence from the point of view of Hungarian, Jewish and Communist history that Bela Kun and the dozens of others people’s commissars who dominated the Hungarian republic of Soviets in 1919 were of Jewish origin. Or as an American historian has put it: ‘The Jews were highly visible in the revolutions of Russia and Germany; in Hungary, they seemed omnipresent.’”

Thus, Joseph Welch is condemned as an ignoramus on the basis of Jewish admissions alone. What sort of university lecturer is it who has not consulted the most basic of facts while trumpeting his “wisdom” to his students? Turning now to Gennady Estraikh’s essay, “The Yiddish Language Communist Press” we read on p.66:

“In the 1920’s and 1930’s, millions of people, including a considerable number of Jews outside of Russia, revered Moscow as the future capital of a just and democratic civilization. Yiddish Communism formed a distinct subculture in the international Communist movement, being overseen, in one way or another, by the apparatus of the Comintern, the Communist International…regardless of their country of domicile, the Communists of East European vintage represented a relatively homogeneous group of people who were devoted to the Soviet Union – that faraway proletarian fatherland…Through the blur of distance, time, and utopian expectations, the Soviet Union became a dream land of freedom and equality. Many Jewish Communists went so far as to regard themselves as ‘Soviet foreigners’, to borrow a term provided by Hirsh Bloshtein, an Argentinian and later Soviet Yiddish poet.”

And what says Joseph Welch to these amazing admissions of international Jewish sympathy for Bolshevism? Why, he doesn’t. In his mind, Jewish admissions of guilt equal “Nazi propaganda”.

In his essay “The Moscow State Yiddish Theater as a Cultural and Political Phenomenon” Jeffrey Veidlinger writes:

“Soon after the revolution of 1917, the Communist Party in Russia realized that in order to create a base of support among the non-Russian minority nations, it would need to encourage the communication of Soviet ideals in local languages and discourses. Thus, Bolshevik thinkers and activists created Communist literary unions, films, and theaters in the languages of the minority nations. The hope was that these institutions would provide effective Communist education, such that national distinctions and aspirations would eventually be replaced by a supranational class consciousness. It was in this context that the Communist party, and particularly its ‘Jewish section’, (Evsektsiia), supported the establishment and promotion of Yiddish theater. The Evsektsiia believed that theater, with its mass appeal and revolutionary associations could reach working-class Jews in a way that no other medium could.” (p.84)

Ezra Mendelsohn provides further evidence of the Jewish involvement in revolutionary art in his essay “Jews, Communism, and Art in Interwar America”. He writes:

“All this provides ample evidence for the existence of large numbers of left-wing Jewish artists in interwar America. The substantial Jewish presence on the left was, of course, nothing new – Jews had been prominent in the European and American socialist movements before the First World War and in the wake of the Russian Revolution, many had joined the Communist movement. During the 1920’s, the American Yiddish-language Communist daily newspaper, Di Frayhayt (later Morgen frayhayt) had a larger readership than did the English language equivalent, The Daily Worker, while at least one third of the members of the Central Committee of the party were Jews.” (p.100)

At least three prominent Communist cartoonists of the Depression era were Jews, Louis Lozowick, William Gropper and Hugo Gellert. Mendelsohn concludes his essay with the following amazing words:

“…the alliance of some Jews with Communism has much to tell us about a central dilemma in modern Jewish life: that of finding one’s way between the utopian, messianic, and often dangerous urge to change the world, on the one hand, and the natural wish to identify with one’s own people, with its sufferings and achievements, on the other. Whether or not they explicitly acknowledged it, American Jewish artists’ choice in favor of the former alternative was, at least in some ways, a Jewish choice.” (p.127)

As always, the erudite Joseph Welch, confronted with these and similar damning admissions on the Counterknowledge.com debate site, has nothing to offer by way of rebuttal. He can only snarl about lack of peer review and published articles (publication in The Nationalist Times obviously does not count). It would be idle to continue quoting from “Dark Times, Dire Consequences”. If the above does not suffice to convince, further quotations would hardly reinforce the already established. “Dark Times, Dire Consequences” is only one of dozens of research volumes establishing the truth of Jewish Communism beyond any reasonable doubt. Joseph Welch, a minor figure on campus, is of no consequence himself. But he is an all too typical example of the intellectual corruption of the academy. As a lecturer, he is entrusted with the education of the students. Yet he cannot even educate himself on a suppressed truth he dare not face. Mr. Welch’s intellectual cowardice on the dread subject of Jews and Communism typifies the intellectual cowardice of the professors who employ him. These professors also quail before the reality of Jewish Communism, just as they run in terror from technologically impossible “gas chambers”, a kangaroo court at Nuremberg and six million “lost and found”. Recently a major university in Canada was threatened with the loss of a large yearly donation by a Jew irate over a little objective examination of the state of Israel’s odious policies. The university quickly back tracked. That is the reality of intellectual freedom on campus. The brave and intrepid seekers after truth on campus, secure in their ivory towers, know who signs their paychecks. They may insult the values of their students and their parents, but they bow down before Zion. That is why, like Joseph Welch, they deny the most firmly established facts to be found in their own reference volumes, while genuflecting before missing ashes.

AN INTERESTING COMPARISON

Students of things Jewish will recall that when Baruch Goldstein shot down over forty Arabs at prayer in a mosque Jews in both Israel and the U.S. called him “the sweetest Jew who ever lived”. They opined that he did not kill enough Arabs actually, but “it was a good start”. Learned rabbis proclaimed that “a thousand dead Arabs were not worth a live Jews fingernail”. Goldstein’s admirers built a shrine to him in Israel with an eternal flame. Jews continue to worship there daily. Curiously, none of these Jews, then or now, were prosecuted for “hate speech” or “incitement to violence”. But, lo and behold, when an Australian man tells a Jew in public to fuck himself, that man is hauled into court and convicted for “promoting hatred” against an ethnic group. He gets a three year jail citizen.

Observe, then. The Chosen People can maim and murder with impunity. Those who merely talk back to the Chosen People get jail time.

LEGAL WARFARE

Jewish lawyers are very innovative. At Nuremburg they concocted the novel theory of “criminal organizations”. Now they have concocted the innovative theory of “financing terrorism”. How does this concept work? The Jews first sue because some Jew on a boat got assassinated by a Hamas terrorist. They target the Palestinian Authority or some other Arab entity as an alleged or actual financier of the terrorist. Then, when they have a verdict, they freeze the assets of the Arab organization in the U.S. and use those to pay off the plaintiff. Now, anyone who can think can see that this innovative procedure could very obviously be used against the Jews the same way. Jewish organizations send millions of tax free dollars overseas to Israel to fund Jewish settlements and bulldoze Arabs into the rubble. Can Arab plaintiffs therefore sue the Jewish organizations and collect against their assets the same way? Of course not. Clever legal theories are instruments of political war fare and are to be applied only against one’s enemies, not one’s friends.

Besides, were such legal concepts applied to the past Jews would really be in trouble. After all, Jews in the 1940’s were shipping all kinds of munitions and armaments illegally to Palestine to murder British officials, policemen and soldiers. Surely the surviving relatives of these Zionist atrocities should be allowed to sue and to freeze the assets of the Jews in America who financed, aided and abetted these atrocities and collect too. But that would never do. The Talmud teaches that there should be one law for the Jew and another law for the gentile. What is good for the goose is not good for the gander. That is basic Zionist logic. The Palestinian Authority must pay for liquidating Florida Chosen Ones; Menachem Begin, Yitzhak Shamir, Nathan Yellin-Mor and others shall never have to petition the American Jewish Committee, the Jewish Agency for Palestine and the World Zionist Organization to hold them harmless and indemnify them for their well-documented crimes.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2003/dec/24/israel1

I wonder what all the Jew “diversity” propagandists in the U.S. think of this? Tsk, tsk.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vsDJ3YivBSA&feature=player_embedded

Here is your great, fucking “democracy”, Ronnie Schmuck. Let’s hope that you get it the same way.

FALSEHOOD IN HISTORY

A Jewess shyster has sued ex-president Jimmy Carter over his book, “Palestine: Peace, Not Apartheid”, alleging that it defames Israel with false and misleading information. The suit is grounded on a New York State Consumer Protection statute which is designed to protect consumers from deceptive advertising and misleading products. The suit is merit less on its face. The statute is designed to protect the public from fraudulent commerce, not historical debate. Whether “Palestine: Peace, Not Apartheid” contains erroneous facts or errors of interpretation is not relevant. All sorts of historical and political books contain errors of fact and interpretation. No one has hitherto suggested that the judiciary should be an overseer of historical truth. Were this Jewess serious about historical truth, she would have done better to sue Miss Joan Peters over her notorious historical fraud, “From Time Immemorial”. Or she might have sued the New York Times over the outrageous prevarications of Walter Duranty on the Ukrainian famine.

The Jewess shyster is clearly culpable of abuse of process. She is misusing the legal system to promote Zionist political objectives. She will not be fined or disbarred. Her Jewish friends shall see to that. But the fact that a Chosen lawyer can even attempt such a maneuver is indicative of just how far the Jews have come in their takeover of America. In 1950’s or 1960’s America no lawyer, especially a Jewish one, would ever have dared to sue an American ex-president, especially over a difference of political opinion. The implied warning to Americans is: “Do not dare oppose us. If we can sue an ex-president for criticizing Israel, guess what we can do to you.”

THE DEAD DREAM OF ZIONISM

Every day it becomes more evident that the original Jewish objections to Zionism were correct. Jews are more loyal to Israel than they are to the United States and the land of their births. One need merely look at men like representatives Eric Cantor and Steve Cohen to know this. They devote more energy to representing Israel than they do representing their constituents. Cantor and Cohen are by no means unique. Tom Lantos, Brad Sherman, Nina Lowey and many others do the same thing. When the Balfour Declaration was first proposed, Lucien Wolf, Edwin Montagu, and many other prominent English Jews denounced the declaration in the most vehement terms as tainting the Jews of the United Kingdom with dual loyalty. The Jews have come a long way since that original unease. Now they can claim, with a straight face, that Israel’s interests and America’s interests are the same – and anyone who suggests otherwise is an anti-Semite.

The original Zionists were very careful to pretend that they were not going to dispossess and expel the indigenous Arab population of Palestine. They disavowed any desire to create a Jewish state – and spoke only of a desire to create a Jewish “national home” in which both Arabs and Jews would have equal rights. Now these Zionists proclaim that the state that they were never going to create has an inalienable “right” to exist. The Arabs expelled in 1948 continue to languish in miserable U.N. refugee camps across the Jordan river – or barely subsist in the vast open air prison of Gaza. The Jews who objected to a “Judenfrei” Germany do everything in their power to create an “Arab-free” Israel. They continue to build on confiscated Arab land and to expand Zionist lebensraum at every opportunity. They treat Arabs as second class citizens as they continue to wail over the persecution of Jews throughout the centuries.

The English Jews who objected to Zionism in Lord Balfour’s time were concerned that it would violate the rights of the Arab population of Palestine and put the Jews in the role of aggressors against the native Palestinian population. Sine that charge has been fulfilled to the letter, present day Jews attempt to invert the truth by screaming about suicide bombers. In the Zionist state Jews practice the Nazism they denounced in the Germans. They impose roadblocks, deny equal rights to housing and land leasing and generally attempt to ghettoize the Arabs the same way that Jews were once ghettoized in Europe. Zionist Israel is a tribute to massive Jewish hypocrisy.

Before the creation of Israel, Jews could hide behind the Jewish persecution myth. But Israel has destroyed that myth. Israel has shown the Jew, not as persecuted, but as the persecutor. Israel has also shown Jews as the true force in international politics. Israel gets what it wants from the United States because Jewish money controls the politicians. Israel is the proof that Zionism rules the world of politics. As the original opponents of the Balfour declaration feared, Zionism has become the anti-Semites dream and the Jews nightmare. The Jews shall not abandon their Zionist dream, even as it pulls them toward the abyss. The wiser ones see what is coming but their protests shall fall on the deaf ears of their leaders. Zionism shall devastate the Middle East and pull down the Jews of the Diaspora with them.

HOLIDAY IN THEIR HEARTS

New York Herald Tribune
May 1, 2010

Dear Sirs:

Every time the Arab suicide bombers of Palestine blow up an Israeli official or splatter Israeli diners with their meals, the anti-Semites of America make a little holiday in their hearts. Not all the anti-Semites, of course. Some anti-Semites continue to believe that there are both good Jews and bad Jews, and that the bad Jews can be reformed. These anti-Semites read Freud, not facts. The anti-Semites to whom we refer survived the Jewish commissars. These are the anti-Semites who helped Hitler and the Nazis shoot Jews. These anti-Semites are John Demjanjuk clones who wish, after their torture and travail in Zionist staged kangaroo courtrooms, that they really had committed the crimes with which they were charged. These are the anti-Semites who have had their careers and livelihoods destroyed by speaking like Jimmy Carter. These anti-Semites, who have suffered under the heel of Zion, rejoice whenever the survivors of non-existent “gas chambers” suffer their personal Deir Yasseins.

Throughout the centuries, the Jews have had a free shot at all those who tell the truth about them. But no more. Holocaust Denial is rising; the Middle East is rising; the Arabs of Palestine are rising. The anti-Semites are only making a little holiday in their hearts at present. But they may be making a bonfire at much bigger political rallies before long.

By Ben Himmler,

Hollywood’s Foremost Screenwriter

“WE SHALL HATE OR WE SHALL FAIL”

The present war against the Zionists is proof that 1948 was a failure. Had the Wicked Kaiser of the Kike-Reich been hanged then, we would not be fighting today. The spiked helmets of Imperial Zionist Culture would have been replaced by the goose stepping “Heil Herzl” bastards of today, but their objectives are the same – first the Middle East and then the world! Professor Sperry has aptly warned us of the Zionist Octopus. The tentacles of AIPAC are everywhere. Zionist traitors like Joseph Lieberman, Charles Shumer, Eric Cantor, Steve Cohen, Brad Sherman and Nina Lowy sit in the House and Senate. Their Zimmerman telegrams to Nicholas Sarkoczy stir up rebellion against white America. Like the Lusitania of yore these evil Zionists kidnap relief ships and execute passengers in cold blood. They attack American intelligence ships and pretend that they made a mistake. (Like the Star Spangled Banner, the “rockets red glare” made positive identification impossible.)

Bagels, like sauerkraut, undermine American culture and values. Zionists in Hollywood make blondes bend over to satisfy their perverted lusts. (“They saw, they conquered, they came”, proclaimed Israel Caesar.) This is the fate that awaits you, fellow Americans, if the Zionist-Fascists triumph. Therefore, to save your country, as the Arabs once tried to save Palestine, “you must hate Jews and all that they stand for, or you will fail.” You must hate, for in the Zionist Jew there exists no good. The Jew of Imperial Zionism is the beast unleashed. He is a murdering, raping, Jack-The-Ripper lunatic. Remember what he did to handless Belgian babies at Deir Yassein. The Hun of Imperial Zionism once hunted Arabs in the Holy Land; now he hunts Americans. He wants to transform the “land of the free and the home of the brave” into a Gaza for whites. Americans shall become the beasts of the field, “hewers of wood and drawers of water”, to serve him.

“You must hate or you will fail”, ladies and gentlemen. There must be no compromise with the sign of the beast. He wears the insignia of 6-6-6 – and he is coming for you.

Rex Stout
A Nero Wolfe Historical Parody

A FLAG WAS BORN – BY BEN PROPAGANDIST

In 1948, a flag was born in Palestine. It was really the hammer and sickle in Palestine but it advertised itself as the Stars and Stripes. Yes, in Palestine in 1948, the Pilgrim Fathers of Zionism created a new land in the wilderness, exactly as the pilgrims created their “New England” in America. Naturally, there was an enemy to be overcome and it was the same in both cases – the British. The “Brutish” were oppressing those “Swamp Fox” Zionist freedom fighters named the Irgun, the Haganah and the Stern gang. The British were actually hanging freedom fighters whose only crimes were to blow up British trains, dynamite hotels, assassinate British officials and lob explosives into crowds of civilians.

Lord Cornwallis/Field Marshall Bernard Law Montgomery was forced to flee back to London. Mel Gibson type Zionists ambushed English soldiers at every opportunity. Why, Ben Hecht actually applauded Mel’s dead eye musket as he drew the bead on one English Nazi after another. The Zionists breached the barricades at Gaza as the Egyptian Pashas surrendered. A flag was born as the Arab Indians evacuated their villages and fled into the Jordanian desert. The old Hickories of Zionist colonialism, like Ariel Sharon and Moishe Dayan, stood proud. They had butchered the Redskin savages at Deir Yassein. The Ram’s horns of the Zionist cavalry blared in triumph.

And so a flag was born. The American goyim had no idea what had really happened – and do not until this day. They listen to the stirring strains of “Exodus” – and learn their history at the feet of the Hollywood moguls.

“ALL QUIET ON THE FRAULEIN’S RUMP

Students of the World War One era shall recall Erich Maria Remarque’s classic anti-war novel on the insane slaughter of the First World War. But just to show that nothing ever changes – and to show that those who forget the past are condemned to repeat it – we now have the stirring feminist novel of women at war – “All Quiet on the Fraulein’s Rump” by Erika Marie Cunt. Like the youthful schoolboys of 1914, the feminists think that war is a great adventure. Inspired by Joan of Arc, they imagine themselves to be mighty warriors, capable of defeating Roman legions even as they collapse hysterically into the arms of the drill sergeants who are “sexually harassing” them. These women die by the thousands in the “no man’s land” of Afghanistan. They are brutally mass raped by Taliban savages and die with their breasts hacked off in the mountain passes. They discover that war is not about pinched tits and groped buttocks. Their shrieks of horror are drowned out by the latest media cacophony about drunken Navy Dinner Parties. As the mutilated feminist lies dead on the battlefield with a cartridge casing on her blood stained posterior, all is indeed “quiet on the Fraulein’s rump”.

Well, well, total silence. Two pecker heads with two inch dicks between their ears have nothing to say. We may be sure that Ronnie prick is searching frantically for a sentence or two he can play with. (Hey! I’ve got it! I compared the attack on the Turkish refugee ship with the sinking of the Lusitania. But we all know that the Lusitania sank but the Turkish relief ship didn’t. Therefore, John Thames is a liar, a falsifier of historical data and a charlatan! Way to go, Ronnie, I’m always happy to help out.)

As for poor, stupid Fang, he is probably taking instant history for dummies right now and consulting his crib notes to figure out who Rex Stout and Ben Hecht were, not to mention reading up on some of their inflammatory writings. (We all know how Fangbeer spends his life in the research library.) Tood-a-loo, asshole heads. I smoked you again.

A CASE DEMONSTRATION OF A CERTAIN CONNECTION

The old Poale-Zion of Czarist Russia wanted a Jewish Marxist state in Arab Palestine. Did they succeed? Theoretically no but to a large practical extent yes, they did succeed. Ben-Gurion, the first Prime Minister of Israel and its founding father, was a member of Poale-Zion. When the Poale Zion split in 1920 into democratic right wing and revolutionary left wing factions, Ben-Gurion aligned with the right. His efforts were compounded when the Soviet Union formally banned Zionism in 1922, although Poale-Zion was allowed to function until 1928. Ben-Gurion organized the Ahdut Ha-Avodah, an amalgam of Poale-Zion and several other Zionist parties. That was the foundation of Zionism in the early 1920’s and it all flowed from Poale-Zion.

Poale-Zion was Marxist-Socialist to the core. Its chief theoretician was Dov “Ber” Borochov, the author of “The National Question and the Class Struggle”. His thesis was that the Jewish proletariat must rise in Palestine rather than Russia because of the usual Marxist clap trap about alleged “historical necessities”. Borochov returned to Russia from Palestine after the revolution and organized Jewish “Red Brigades” to fight for Trotsky’s Red Army. Both Ben-Gurion and his friend Ben-Zvi were thoroughly versed in Borochov’s teachings. It should be obvious, then, that Poale-Zion had a major influence both on Zionism’s “George Wahington” but also on the early formation of the Zionist pre-state. Thus, once again, the very deep connection between Zionism in Palestine and Jewish Marxism in Russia is demonstrated.

WHEN DID COMMUNISM BECOME ANTI-SEMITIC?

As students of the subject know, pre-World War Two Communism in Russia was largely Jewish. But now Communism in Russia is generally regarded as an anti-Jewish, anti-Zionist movement. When did this change occur and what, generally speaking, caused the shift? The basic change came in the late 1940’s/early 1950’s when the Jewish revolutionary parties of pre-1917 were finally shut down. It must be realized that by no means all of the Jewish Marxists of the late Czarist era were members of the Communist Russian Social Democratic Labor Party. The vast majority were split among the other radical Jewish parties, most of which were either Zionist-Marxist and/or Territorialist/Jewish autonomous. These Jews were largely incorporated into Communist Party after the October 1917 revolution. But their Nationalist/Zionist predilections clashed with assimilation, the Party’s formal solution to the age-old “Jewish question”. The Party attempted to deal with this problem through various methods, among them the use of the Evsektsiia, the Jewish Section, to integrate them into the Party, lectures against Zionism and conversion of Jewish religious tales to a Communist format to preach the Communist message.

Nevertheless, the problem remained that large numbers of Communist Jews were also Zionist Jews. The Party could not afford to alienate such a large based of pro-Bolshevik sympathy and thus had to play its cards carefully. Accordingly, the Party allowed Poale-Zion, the world-wide union of the Jewish Workers, to exist until 1928 because, as a Marxist-Zionist political party, it could be used to placate the Zionist sympathies of Russian Jewry without repudiating Communism. By 1928 Joseph Stalin, the former Nationalities Commissar, conceived the idea of setting up a Jewish Autonomous Region in Siberia called Birobidzhan. Once the Birobidzhan scheme commenced, Zionism was officially dead in Soviet Russia.

From this point on the old Jewish duality of Marxism-Zionism in Stalinist Russia was essentially finished. The Jewish stranglehold on the commissariats continued until the early 1950’s, especially in the Iron Curtain countries of Eastern Europe. But one of the big reasons for the liquidation of the formerly omnipresent Jewish power was the Soviet fear of divided loyalties. This fear became particularly acute after the creation of the state of Israel in 1948. Standard histories of the Soviet Union cannot explain the Soviet turn against the Jews in the early 1950’s for two reasons:

(1) They do not want to acknowledge the formerly dominant Jewish role in the Soviet Union;

(2) They do not want to discuss the very complicated intertwining of Marxist-Zionist politics, 1880-1917, because of the implications of these facts for the background of the state of Israel.

This is the fundamental explanation for the reluctance of the historians to discuss the Marxist-Zionist connection, as well as the fundamental explanation for the move of Communist Russia against the Jews when they had formerly been the dominant force in Communism. It is not hard to understand but the relevant historical background lies deeply buried.

Communism in Russia is generally regarded as an anti-Jewish, anti-Zionist movement. When did this change occur and what, generally speaking, caused the shift? The basic change came in the late 1940’s/early 1950’s when the Jewish revolutionary parties of pre-1917 were finally shut down.

Your knowledge of Communism in Russia is retarded. Lenin and the Bolsheviks attacked all the jewish and zionist parties as nationalists from the beginning. In 1903 the Bolsheviks removed the Bund from the party coalition, banned the teaching of Hebrew, closed down the Zionist parties, and arrested and killed thousands of their members in 1919 and 1920, including members of Poalei Tziyon. Any group which advertised a separate national culture was considered an enemy of the proletariat.

Accordingly, the Party allowed Poale-Zion, the world-wide union of the Jewish Workers, to exist until 1928

The party never allowed Poalei Tziyon to freely exist, but hounded them to extinction. The last congress of Poalei Tziyon in Russia took place in 1917. Poalei Tziyon split and disbanded in 1922. The remaining Russian members of Poalei Tziyon hobbled along under constant threat until 1928, when they were killed by the NKVD.

the reluctance of the historians to discuss the Marxist-Zionist connection . . . the relevant historical background lies deeply buried.

To a dummy like you maybe. To everyone else in the world Russian communist history is widely known, and freely available.

Ronnie:

Your knowledge of Communism is on a par with your understanding of non-existent “gas chambers”. I suggest you get a copy of “National Communism in the Soviet union, 1918-1928″ by Baruch Gurevitz and actually read it, pecker head. The Communists always denounced Zionism as heresy but were, practically speaking, willing to tolerate it, up to a point, because so many Jewish Communists were also Zionists. This all came to a head in the 1928-1929 period when Birobidzhzn was in the process of being set up. Also, the Party denounced the 1929 Wailing Wall riots in Palestine, taking the side of the Arabs and thereby alienating the Zionist members of the heavily Jewish Communist Party.

You can read all about it in Melech Epstein’s, “The Jew and Communism” published about 1958. You can also read the Chapter entitled “The Struggle With Lenin” in Nora Levin’s “While Messiah Tarried”. You are, for once. right about the split in 1903 where the Bolsheviks expelled the Bund over Jewish territorialism. That was the issue Stalin tried to resolve with the Birobidzhan project.

Now let’s read the rebuttal to Joseph Welch about which you remain deadly silent. You can recite your lines while sucking off a camel. It should improve your diction.

And one other thing, Ronnieschmuck. It is, and always was, Jewish Communism – as I’ve proved a thousand times over.

…It is, and always was, Jewish Communism – as I’ve proved a thousand times over

Weren’t you the dope who said this the other day:

Communism . . . is generally regarded as . . . anti-Jewish . . . When did this change occur . . . The basic change came in the late 1940’s/early 1950’s…

It’s never too late to get yourself a GED goober!

James still in desperate need of pussy I see.

Pascal thinks that pussy is historical debate. Poor Pascal.

Ronnie, the Talmudic nitpicker, “thinks” he has discovered a contradiction. He hasn’t. I’ve never varied from the position that Communism was Jewish dominated until 1950. So what is new?

I’ve never varied from the position that Communism was Jewish dominated until 1950

Except when you haven’t:

it is, and always was, Jewish Communism

Quit making a fool of yourself on this old post, and study for that GED already dummy.

Stop the silly dialectics, Ronnie Scum. You’ve lost the argument on Jews and Communism a thousand times over – just like you lost the debate on “gas chambers” and “six million” a thousand times over.

Now do us all a favor and drop dead.

http://200yearstogether.wordpress.com/2010/12/11/chapter-19-in-the-1930s/

Now here is one for that kosher dialectician, Fang. Let’s watch him write on how Solzhenitsyn is distorting the facts on Jews and Communism in the 1930’s U.S.S.R. As always, John Thames is “making it up”.

So I get it from Donald Duck.com do I? Not quite.

http://www.vho.org/tr/2004/3/Strauss342-351.html

James, James there is no historical debate. Just your ravings which indicate that you suffer from PDS or pussy deprivation syndrome.

Now ehy don’t you be a good boy and take out 1000 dollars from your bank account and get some pussy.

You are quite right, Pascal. There is indeed no debate – as I’ve already proved. Pussy is your problem, not mine.

CLOSE THE DOOR AT ALL COSTS

When people have the Nazi “gas chamber’ hoax explained to them their usual response is to ask: Why? There are three basic reasons. The first is to provide Jewry with both a sword and a shield. Whenever the Jews are criticized they can hide behind their hoax. Anyone who objects to their disproportionate power and subversive influence can be dismissed as a “Nazi!” who wants to exterminate them a second time. The second reason was to provide a rationale and a cover for the creation of the Jewish state in Palestine. Because the Germans had supposedly exterminated six million Jews, therefore the survivors should be given a place of refuge to compensate them. (Of course, the Arabs had nothing to do with the supposed extermination. And “rescuing Jews” had never been an objective of Zionism. But those are subjects in themselves.) The Germans could then be blackmailed into paying reparations forever for an extermination that never took place. A third, and largely forgotten reason, was to cover up the Jewish Communist charge. By manufacturing a hoax of their own supposed extermination, the Jews could cover up their own murder of millions in Soviet Russia.

The “gas chamber” hoax, then, has been extremely useful to the Jews. But it also represents a real danger to them if the truth is ever exposed. Bluntly stated, if the truth ever comes out, the fake extermination shall be replaced by a real extermination. This is the reason the Jews have forced the politicians to pass laws making it a criminal offense to “deny the Holocaust”. These laws exist all over Europe and Canada. These laws are a tribute to the power of the Jews. The “gas chamber” story is not merely false, it is a veil for an evil power controlling the world. In a sense, it is “The Mother of All Lies”. It is the clearest possible proof of a Jewish international conspiracy.

In short, if the “gas chamber” hoax is exposed a great door is opened into a vast vault of historical secrets. The door must be kept closed, at all costs.

MUZZLE MOUTH ANTISEMITISM

The cases of actor Charlie Sheen and French fashion designer John Galliano are sending an ominous message to all the rich and successful of the glitterati –criticize Jews at your peril. Charlie Sheen did nothing more than identify his producer by name as a Jew. The remaining episodes of his show were cancelled and Charlie was placed on probation. Galliano allegedly praised Hitler and his alleged massacre of Jews at a bar. He was promptly arrested for violating French anti-racial incitement laws. Clearly, speaking out against Jews in allegedly free societies can be very hazardous.

But no such restrictions apply to Jews. Let us take the clearest possible illustration. Twenty years ago Baruch Goldstein from New York gunned down over forty Arabs at prayer in a mosque. His fellow Jews referred to him as “the sweetest Jew who ever lived”. They said that he had not killed enough Arabs actually but he had made a “good start”. They even proclaimed that “a thousand dead Arabs were not worth a live Jews fingernail”. No one, then or now, suggested that these Jews should be prosecuted for “hate speech”. Jews in Israel built an eternal flame shrine to Goldstein where thousands of Jews worship annually. No one demands that this “memorial to hatred” be torn down. Yet men who merely make token anti-Jewish comments are castigated in the media and dragged before law courts. The disparity is both shocking and ominous.

Jews are being very, very stupid. They think that non-Jews do not notice these things. But if people in highly paid positions who depend on Jewish employers are now willing to speak out despite the personal risks involved, then a great reaction against Jewish power must be building. Attempting to damn it by putting muzzles over people’s mouths will only make it much worse.

Twenty years ago Baruch Goldstein from New York gunned down over forty Arabs at prayer in a mosque. His fellow Jews referred to him as “the sweetest Jew who ever lived”. . . No one demands that this “memorial to hatred” be torn down.

1. The murders by Goldstein took place in 1994, which is 17 years ago not “20.”

2. Goldstein murdered 29 people not “over forty.”

3. The murders took place at the Cave of the Patriarch’s Isaac Hall. It is the second most holy site for jews. The crusaders turned it into a church, the Mamelukes turned it into a mosque forbidding jews and christians from worshipping there. It is run by the Palestinian Authority and the Muslim Waqf which still prohibits jews from accessing parts of it.

4. The Israeli government condemned the massacre, and arrested Kahane followers.

5. Goldstein was immediately denounced with shocked horror.

6. Most in Israel classify Goldstein as insane. Jews have been allowed to worship there since the Six-Day War, always armed because it is in Hebron, and there never have been weapons been used by Jews against Moslems before or after that event. The same cannot be said for weapons used by Moslems against Jews and Christians there or around the middle east in general.

7. Kahane supporters established a memorial to Goldstein at his gravesite after the murders.

8. Israel passed a law prohibiting monuments to terrorists.

9. In 1999, the IDF bulldozed the Goldstein memorial.

Charlie Sheen did nothing more than identify his producer by name as a Jew

Charlie Sheen is a crackhead, and his show was cancelled because he is suffering from the classic, cocaine-induced psychotic disorders with delusions.

The cases of actor Charlie Sheen and French fashion designer John Galliano are sending an ominous message to all the rich and successful of the glitterati –criticize Jews at your peril. Charlie Sheen did nothing more than identify his producer by name as a Jew.

Yes, Charlie Sheen, that icon of self control, did nothing more then a boat load of coke, get convicted for assault, challenge his boss to a fight, and demand a 50% raise.

The guy’s a drug addicted asshole who beats hookers and thinks his fame grants him elite human status. No wonder John defends him.

Ronnie and Fang are their usual bullshit selves. “The murders took place “Seventeen years ago, not twenty”; it was really” 29 dead, not forty” (and what about the wounded, asshole?). Oh wow, really important details, right Ronnie? Of course, his fellow Jews condemned him. Did they really? Why the silence about all those juicy documented statements by all those Jews who condemned what he did? Bullshit, bullshit and more bullshit.

Oh yes, and Fangstupid. Charlie Sheen has been doing dope for years with no ill effects on his behavior. Ditto with making it with hookers.. What got him canned was mentioning that his producer was a kike hiding behind an alias. That – and nothing else – did it.

Jews have been committing Deir Yassein type slaughters for the past sixty years. Goldstein was only too typical.

And where is the refutation of Solzhenitsyn, o turd shits? Is Ronnie going to accuse him of copying it from Donald Duck.com?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Baruch_Goldstein

Hey, Ronnie Lie Shit:

Note how in 2010 Psycho-Kikes were dressing up as Goldstein and praising his deeds to their children. Jews are really sorry about what he did – because you say so, prick.

http://lalqila.wordpress.com/2010/05/28/pre-partition-wanted-posters-of-the-palestine-police-force-includes-terrorists-like-menahem-begin-and-yitshak-shamir/

Here are some juicy photos of future prime ministers of Israel who thought they were above British law. Learn some facts, Fangstupid.

Charlie Sheen has been doing dope for years with no ill effects on his behavior.

John Thames. Such a fine judge of character. Who wouldn’t want a job with John though. Damn. You can take months off at a time for rehab. Threaten to fight your boss, beat women, come to work stoned, and demand more than double the highest salary in your field. Sounds like a good gig. So long as you don’t call your boss a Jew you’re golden.

On second thought, double the salary for “assistant jew hater” probably doesn’t amount to a hell of a lot in the market to begin with. But hey, talking to John is like a historical acid trip so there’s a benefit, right?

Oh wow, really important details, right Ronnie?

*Yes, really important facts you got wrong again!

*More and more proof that you’re wrong on the facts all the time. for any reader careless enough to stumble onto this old post.

*Your constant, repeated mistakes are what make the John Thames Turkey Shoot such a fun diversion.

*Your sloppy reasoning – which are based on your invented facts, and just plain wrong facts – are that much more amusing to read!

*You are my favorite poster-boy for irrational jew hatred, keep up the good work!

and go study for the GED you dummy

Ronnie Stupid Shit is a scholar of the footnotes.

Ronnie thinks that if every detail of every account is not 100% accurate, that that disproves the main point (which Ronnie always ignores or gets completely wrong). Let’s give dumb fuck Ronnie a lesson in concepts called weight, relevance and obiter dicta. (Ditto for Fang Shit who is equally stupid.) Relevance means: What has it to do with the subject? The issue here is that Jews made incredibly bigoted, incendiary remarks after a mass murder by one of their own. They were not prosecuted for hate speech. Mr. Galliano does and gets nailed. The double standard is striking. Ronnie ignores the point and says: “Aha! It was only 29 dead, not 40.” Ronnie ignores the relevance.

Next, Ronnnie ignores weight of the evidence. Not merely does the number of dead not mitigate the evil of Goldstein’s mass murder, it does not lessen the hypocrisy of the Jews who reserve for themselves the hate speech they deny to others. These simple observations are ignored by Ronnie, while he quibbles over figures. Finally, we come to the concept called obiter dicta. If a debate is taking place on a given subject, then a comment on a side matter, accurate or not, does not disprove the main point under consideration. It is like a judge’s personal comments in a criminal case that do not bear directly on the verdict. Those comments on not legally binding and are not case law for future use. They are not precedent.

The relevant questions here are:

(1)Why do Jews have the right to make bigoted comments but not non-Jews?

(2)Why does anyone have an obligation to love Jews as the price of a job?

Since Ronnie and Fang cannot address the two relevant questions, I get every form of insult and nonsense under the sun but the relevant considerations are ignored, as always. Fang and Ronnie have specialized in lies, innuendo and false accusation ever since this debate began. I recall that Fang originally accused me of being Professor Kevin MacDonald in disguise. When that lie collapsed, next I was accused of copying and pasting other people’s essays when in fact they were my own essays. Ronnie keeps alleging that I get my information from Stormfront and Donald Duck.com when in fact I get it straight out of Jewish reference volumes and world renowned authors like the late Alexander Solzhenitsyn.

Anyone who looks at this debate knows that my essays are cogent and well informed. Anyone who looks at the postings of Ronnie and Fang will find nothing but defamatory statements, personal attacks, carping among the footnotes, and a deliberate unwillingness to address the real issues. The difference speaks for itself.

Speaking of sex with the underaged, Fang Stupid, I did not write these passages.

http://www.come-and-hear.com/editor/america_2.html

Ronnie thinks that if every detail of every account is not 100% accurate, that that disproves the main point

No, ronnie just thinks you’re dimwit whose facts are always wrong

Hey, Ronnie, you lying little shit. Were all those facts that Solzhenitsyn posted about Jews and Communism wrong? Nothing to say yet, Ronnie? And any comment yet about weight, relevance and obiter dicta? Did you forget to read that, Ronnie? Or are you still too stupid to understand?

When double standards are tolerated, it is because people are afraid of the power of those imposing the double standards. That is why Jews can say “A thousand dead Arabs are not wortha live Jews fingernail” and get away with it but a John Galliano who says that “Hitler should have fucking gassed all the Jew”s gets it. It is called sucking Jew cock as the price of your pay check.

In view of Charlie Sheen and John Galliano, more pertinent than ever.

JEWISH COMMISSARS OF “FREE SPEECH”

When Oliver Stone made the comment that Hitler and Stalin needed to be put in “historical context” the Israeli billionaire and Hollywood film producer, Haim Saban, went ballistic. He was further outraged by the additional comments of Mr. Stone that Hitler did more damage to the Russians than the Jews and that Israel’s media lobby distorts the facts on the Middle East. Saban opined that henceforth Oliver Stone should be allowed to practice his Fifth Amendment rights in retirement. What Haim Saban was really saying was that Jews should be allowed to define the limits of free speech and intellectual inquiry – upon pain of career destruction.

Mr. Saban would undoubtedly argue that the First Amendment only protects citizens from government retaliation, not private retaliation. That is technically correct. However, Haim Saban must surely realize that, historically, Jews have provoked pogroms and expulsions through their anti-social behavior. Among the abuses which the Jews have committed are attempting to stifle criticism of their behavior and to suppress historical interpretations which they deem detrimental to their group interests. A good example of this process was the enormous pressure that was put on former President Jimmy Carter over the publication of his book “Palestine: Peace, Not Apartheid”. Another example was the forced resignation of Marge Schott as the owner of the Cincinnati Reds for her qualified praise of Adolf Hitler. Now Oliver Stone, himself half-Jewish, is getting the “Mel Gibson” treatment.

Haim Saban is unwittingly laying the groundwork for a rising tide of anti-Semitism. People do not care to be told what they can think and how they may express themselves. They particularly do not like to be dictated to as the price of a paycheck. Perhaps these minor considerations do not occur to the arrogant Mr. Saban. But to the man-in-the-street, certain considerations will flow through his mind. He will conclude that if one cannot criticize Jews, then Jews must be the real rulers of these United States. He will conclude that Jews are throwing their weight around and that maybe that evil man, Adolf Hitler, was on to something. He may even consider that the state of Israel is harming U.S. interests in the Middle East – and that super rich Jews like Haim Saban and their campaign contributions – are one of the reasons for U.S. support of Israel. He may even conclude that enforced silence is one of the big reasons for these abuses – and that perhaps those who enforce silence should themselves be silenced.

These are dangerous thoughts indeed – and they lead to reactions well documented in history. Oliver Stone is quite correct that Hitler and Stalin need to be discussed in context. But to raise that context would perturb Haim Saban immensely. It would raise all the forgotten historical facts that he does not want examined. To put Hitler in context would mean recalling the injustices of the Treaty of Versailles and the immense Jewish involvement in same. It would mean remembering the names of the Communist revolutionaries in Germany and Hungary after the Great War – almost all of them Jewish. It would mean remembering all the Jewish commissars who served Joseph Stalin in the 1930’s and 1940’s – before he got around to purging them. It would mean examining Joseph Stalin’s attack plans in 1941 – before Hitler beat him to the punch. No doubt the context of all these matters would even disturb Mr. Stone and some of his mistaken notions. But that is what freedom of speech and intellectual controversy is all about – rocking the boat.

It is blindingly obvious that there is a de facto Jewish approved religion of thought in these United States. This approved religion becomes ever more blatant in its efforts to crush freedom of thought and dissent. The issue is not one of bigotry and intolerance, for what is bigotry to one man is truth to another. Jewish Commissars of “free speech” like Haim Saban should no more be tolerated in these United States than the Jewish gulag commissars of 1930’s Russia should be allowed to die quietly of natural causes in their Moscow apartments.

Haim Saban must learn that “freedom of speech” does not mean the freedom to fellate Haim Saban as the price of Hollywood fame and fortune. The House Un-American Activities Committee once rooted Jewish Communists out of the movie industry. It is time to root ethnic bully boys out of Hollywood, so that both Oliver Stone and Mel Gibson, men of surely diverse viewpoints, can have their say without fear of retaliation.

CRIMES AGAINST THE DISARMED TRUTH

A standard feature of war crimes trials is the charge that the defeated enemy abused captured soldiers. It was a charge leveled at the Confederacy in the Civil War; the same charge was leveled at the Germans during the war in Soviet Russia. In all cases, the food and supply problems inherent in every war, and the behavior of the victorious armies in aggravating the food and supply situation, are deliberately ignored. Thus, in the German-Russian war, the behavior of the Red Army in scorching the earth, destroying crops and carting off livestock to hinder the advancing Wehrmacht, is deemed irrelevant to the starvation of millions of Soviet POW’s in German hands. Similarly, the starvation of Jews in the German labor camps at war’s end had nothing to do with the collapse of the German supply and transport systems, the constant bombing and strafing of the allied air forces or the overcrowding of the German camps as refugees poured in from the east.

It was very much analogous to the execution of the Confederate camp commander, Wirth, at the infamous Andersonville camp for Union prisoners. Wirtz was accused of deliberating starving the soldiers, of denying them clothing, shelter, housing and sanitation. The fact that supply inadequacies made it impossible for Wirth to do any of these things was deliberately ignored by the Union prosecutors. Equally ignored was the behavior of the Union armies in scorching the earth, erasing villages from the map, burning farms and confiscating grain and livestock. It was all Wirtz’s fault. The “barbaric South” had proved its inherent evil. The northern newspapers had a field day with its exposes of Southern mistreatment of Yankee POW’s. Gruesome photos were featured on the front pages. The fact that the North was doing the same things to its prisoners with far less justification was ignored ( the North had the food and supplies; the South did not). Similarly, the Germans were blamed for the deaths in their internment camps while the hundreds of thousands of Germans deliberately starved by Dwight Eisenhower after the war are still officially denied by court historians.

The trial of camp commander Wirtz was a travesty of justice, just like the trials of the German camp commanders. Realities were ignored and the guilt of the accused was assumed in advance. Exculpatory evidence was disregarded and conviction was required for propaganda purposes. Andersonville and Nuremberg were ropes for the falsely accused in their day; now they are ropes around the necks of historical falsifiers.

All kinds of Hollywood actors have drug and behavior problems. Need I mention Lindsay Lohan? But they don’t get driven out of Hollywood or subjected to black lists because of it. Briitany Murphy kicked off a couple of years ago because of constant misuse of drugs. She was idolized by the media upon her passing. But the slightest anti-Semitic comment will finish a Hollywood or fashion industry career instantly. Mr. Mozzarella Meatball Head, otherwise known as Fangstupid, ignores the real point and tries to argue that John Thames has Charlie’s drug problem. Of course, this is the same lying SOB who tried to argue that yours truly was really Kevin MacDonald in disguise, a fact which in no way diminishes his zero credibility.

Ronnie thinks that if every detail of every account is not 100% accurate, that that disproves the main point

Am I the only one enjoying the irony here?

Ronnnie ignores weight of the evidence. Not merely does the number of dead not mitigate the evil of … mass murder

Come on.

This is.

I can’t even.

I don’t.

Sheesh, John. This has to be the single most gob smackingly idiotic line of argument for you to take.

Ever.

You’re really going to argue that your errors are meaningless in context, but we’re supposed to ignore the mass slaughter of millions of Jews because you think there might be some hidden documents in Russia that dispute the actual figures?

You’re going to argue that?

I.

I just don’t know about you John.

I recall that Fang originally accused me of being Professor Kevin MacDonald in disguise.

You have the memory of a Alzheimer’s patient. A dead Alzheimer’s patient. It wasn’t me. Good work Mr. Historian. You can’t even research something that happened to YOU on a website that has the exact conversation for everyone to read. (I found the post you’re talking about in under 10 seconds.) Awesome job.

Joseph Welch said
on 21 April 2009

I’ve found out a bit more about Mr Thames’ champion, Kevin MacDonald. He’s a real charmer:

http://www.splcenter.org/intel/news/item.jsp?aid=252&site_area=1&printable=1
http://www.splcenter.org/blog/2008/10/03/academic-senate-condemns-professor-kevin-macdonald%E2%80%99s-anti-semitic-research/

Perhaps ‘Mr Thames’ is Professor MacDonald under a pseudonym? It would explain a lot.

He,y Mozzarella Meatball Head:

You have no evidence whatever that millions of Jews were murdered by “gassing” or any other method. You simply assume it as a fact, “proven” by bogus testimonies at a kangaroo court. Very impressive. This debate has been going on forever and you still cannot grasp the essential point.

I note that you are as silent as your sidekick about Solzhenitsyn’s very damning documentation on the Jewish Communist connection that you deny. And you still ignore the point about Sheen and the French fashion designer – Jews can make the most blatantly racist statements and get away with it but their critics cannot . As for Joseph Welch making the false accusation rather than you, the false claim was still made by your side, wasn’t it?

And, oh yeah, the non-issue about lesser numbers not justifying mass murder. The Arabs at prayer did nothing to deserve it; the Jews who created Communism surely did. More profundities for your stupid shit brain to ponder.

Kevin Macdonald provokes the same response that I do – his critics cannot argue the facts; they argue alleged bias instead – just like you two shit heads.

Dear Fangstupid:

In re “strict accuracy”: Was it not your side-kick, Joseph Welch, who denied the authenticity of that State department document, “The Power and Aims of International Jewry” that I got out of the National Archives? And was he not just as silent as you when I proved that it was authentic? How come you impose this “strict accuracy” requirement on me but not your side?

And moreover: When are you and Mr. Credentials going to post the rebuttal to the dozen or more scholarly quotations I posted verbatim (and whose accuracy you have not contested)? Are you too lazy to do the typing? Or are you having trouble disproving the facts again?

FUCK YOU, SMILING ASSHOLE FACE.

You have no evidence whatever that millions of Jews were murdered by “gassing” or any other method.

You admitted to the einsatzgruppen murders. Your compatriot David Irving admitted to the Chelmno gas van murders.

11 Q. [Mr Rampton] No, Mr Irving, you see, that is only part of what you have maintained. What you have consistently maintained, so far as I am aware, until perhaps we got some concession in this court yesterday, what you have also maintained is Jews were not killed by the use of homicidal gas?

16 A. [Mr Irving] Oh, I disagree. I have repeatedly allowed that they were killed in gas vans.

That seems like evidence to me. What more evidence do I need other then your own admission?

John, remind me who it was that said this:

Today, all this has been forgotten, particularly by stupid shits like Mr. Welch who never learned the facts in the first place. As to the Einzatsgruppen, I never denied that a lot of Jews were shot. I said the kill total was somewhere between 100,00-1,000,000.

The Arabs at prayer did nothing to deserve it; the Jews who created Communism surely did

Your contention is that each of the Jews that the Nazis shot created communism?

You think that 10,000 to 1,000,000 people created communism?
What a dumb thing to think.

Were all those facts that Solzhenitsyn posted about Jews and Communism wrong?

Probably, but I didn’t read his posts or yours. Solzhenitsyn did no first hand research, and relied almost exclusively on encyclopedias. Relying almost exclusively on encyclopedias is what D-grade high school students do.

Encyclopedias are not used for academic research because they are not free of their own agendas. For example, anyone who wrote a history of Russia, and relied exclusively on The Great Soviet Encyclopedia would not be taken seriously.

Worse, a number of historians examined Solzhenitsyn’s citations to the three encyclopedias he relied on, and found numerous instances where he intentionally omitted, and distorted the sources.

You would need a GED for me to explain Solzhenitsyn further, so go study!

Sillyjisms are Fang’s method of reasoning

The fact is that Jews did create Communism and staffed it in overwhelming profusion for over thirty years. Fang attempts to equate this undeniable fact with the numbers of Jews shot on the Eastern front. The idiocy of the reasoning speaks for itself . As to David Irving, he speaks out of both sides of his mouth on the extermination story. I never considered his views definitive, merely sometimes useful.

The number of Jews killed by the Einzatzgruppen is wildly exaggerated. As for the innocent versus guilty Jews, soldiers fighting wars tend not to make such distinctions, as idiot sophist Fang surely knows.

From this point on I’m going to argue using nothing but John’s own quotes.

The number of Jews killed by the Einzatzgruppen is wildly exaggerated.

[John Thames] ignores weight of the evidence. Not merely does the number of dead not mitigate the evil of … mass murder… I said the kill total was somewhere between 100,00-1,000,000.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MEhkwK4VDTM

I wonder what the boys will say about this one?

As usual, Fangstupid cannot argue facts; he can only argue what his infantile mind imagines to be a contradiction. In the instant case, Mr. Shit-For-Brain confuses the purely factual question of how many Jews the Germans actually killed with the presumed (not proven) mass murder the Germans supposedly committed. Thus, he not merely assumes facts not in evidence; he confuses the moral with the factual. What a terminal fucking idiot.

In the instant case, Mr. Shit-For-Brain confuses the purely factual question of how many Jews the Germans actually killed with the presumed (not proven) mass murder the Germans supposedly committed.

john thames said
on 16 April 2009

There is an abundance of evidence for an “ethnic cleansing” progam.

There is evidence that approximately one to two million Jews perished of all causes during the war

john thames said
on 2 April 2009

Now for the claims of mass executions on the Eastern Front. This claim is partially true.

Watch out, John. It looks like John has you cornered. After all, if the claims of Einzatsgruppen executions are even partially true you’re going to have to explain to yourself why the “number of dead” [does] “not mitigate the evil of … mass murder”

I know what I wrote. Care to explain why the Germans were prosecuting their own soldiers for abusing Jews at the same time the Germans were supposedly exterminating them?

What do Geneva Convention sanctioned executions of partisans engaging in illegal warfare have to do with mass murder, o enlightened shit head?

The liars go silent. It is obvious why.

Care to explain why the Germans were prosecuting their own soldiers for abusing Jews at the same time the Germans were supposedly exterminating them?

john thames said
on 9 April 2009

Going along with the hoax helped to divert attention from tha much greater crimes

What do Geneva Convention sanctioned executions of partisans engaging in illegal warfare have to do with mass murder

john thames said
on 2 April 2009

The true number of Jews killed in World War 2 is between one to two million. That is a lot

And the point is?

john thames said
on 15 February 2011

The answer’s clear to anyone who isn’t a complete idiot.

I have news for you. Finding what you “think” are contradictions (they aren’t) is not going to make your case; neither will quoting the Nuremberg trials.

john thames said
on 11 January 2011

As to the facts, you have no case and never did.

john thames said
on 7 April 2009

The debate is more or less over. The other side has lost on all counts.

The side that won doesn’t need to debate. Instead they choose to prod the loser with a virtual stick.

What are you still doing here John?

And who decided that you won?

Angelo and a lot of others thought that I took you to the cleaners (I did.) Now take your ugly meatball face to the plastic surgeon and get a redo.

And who decided that you won?

Sane people.

By your own proclamation – and nothing more.

Ladies and Gentlemen, as to the caliber of those in dissent I give you exhibit : hanoverfist. Trippetta to John’s Hopfrog!

Of course, on my side I have the consensus of the majority of the westernized world.

But if you want to believe that’s due to the power of my own proclamation then so be it.

Dear FangStupid:

Once upon a time the consensus of the entire planet was that the earth was flat and that the sun revolved around the earth. So much for the consensus of opinion as a test of truth. And, as every schoolboy remembers, Galilleo Gallilee had the consensus of the Catholic Church against him.

Great argument, shit-for-brain. Do better.

Once upon a time 12 year old girls were of breeding age, women knew their place, and the son was responsible for the sins of the father.

I’d be careful with accusations of subscribing to outdated tautology if I were you, John. Your positions put you in the stone age of truth.

“We live in the best of all possible worlds.” So sayeth Fang the genius. In this best of all possible worlds, doubting the indisputable truth of the Holy Hoax is a go to jail offense in many countries. This is the man who parades himself as an apostle of progress, while repudiating freedom of thought and inquiry on his favorite subject.

I am most impressd. It is nice to know that this terminal idiot has finally acknowledged that for many centuries 12 year old girls were, indeed, of legal breeding age. It takes Fang a long time to catch up with facts. As for feminism, it is hardly anything new. If Fang would study the history of the Roman Empire, he would discover that the Romans had a big feminist movement, similar in many ways to the feminist movement of today, that screwed things up back then the same way that feminism is screwing things up today.

“Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it.” No better proof can be found than in the “mind” of Fang The Stupid.

Speaking of the “Stone Age”, o wise one. If I understand the state of Israel, the argument for its existence is: “The ancient Jews occupied Palestine for a brief period of time two to three thousand years ago; this entitles them to a state in the modern world. Forget that the Arabs have been living there for centuries; kick them out based on ancient history.”

Now there is real Sone Age reasoning – subscribed to by you.

Those things that you put in your post around the passage “We live in the best of all possible worlds” are called quotes. A quote is a citation of a passage created by some other author. In your quote you cite me as the author. You failed.

It seems to be a common theme for you with quotes, so I figured you needed the lesson.

while repudiating freedom of thought

There’s quite a difference between repudiating your freedom of thought, and repudiating your thoughts. At what point did I inhibit your ability to think what you think? How could someone possibly do such a thing? It’s not possible. Even your quack examples of Charlie Sheen and Helen Thomas do not illustrate examples of the repression of the freedom of thought. At most, they illustrate examples of the consequences of that freedom.

Just because you have the ability to think freely, that does not mean that others have to subsidize that thought, support it, or support your intent to distribute it. You can think whatever fucked up thing you want. I’ll still call you a idiot for thinking it. I’ll refuse to patronize your business, and I’ll advise others to do the same. After all, you don’t expect me to suspend my freedom so that you don’t have to realize any consequences for exercising yours.

finally acknowledged that for many centuries 12 year old girls were, indeed, of legal breeding age

I never did deny it. What I did do was mock you for thinking you could go to Spain and do it yourself. I did that because I’m disgusted by you for thinking that such an act would be acceptable, stone age philosophy not withstanding.

Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it.

And this is why you are so desperately intent to revise the reality of what happened to Jews in those concentration camps. It’s why you have to try and persuade people that such a thing never happened. It’s not because it never happened. It’s because you want to try that shit again. You said it yourself.

Of course, based on your performance here, I’m not all that concerned. The only people you persuade are psychopathic drug addicts like this guy:

http://patterico.com/2011/03/07/who-said-it-ahmadinejad-or-sheen/

As always, dear Fang, you illustrate your abysmal stupidity with every word that you write. It is your never ending theme. First, you obviously never heard of a paraphrase. A paraphrase is an approximation of what someone said, not an exact quote. i am under no obligation to look up the precise words of the quotes I use to satisfy your Emily Post requirements of debate. Besides, it does absolutely no good to give you exact quotes anyway, since when I do it, as in the case of the quotations from “Dark Times, Dire Consequences”, you offer no rebuttal (you don’t have one) anyway.

Next, the issue of freedom of expression. I’ve heard all the bullshit arguments about how other people don’t have to associate with people whose views they dislike. “You can say it but I can take away your job and livelihood in retaliation.” Uh-uh, asshole. If freedom of speech only protects dissidents from the government but not their employers, then there is no genuine freedom of seech – for the obvious reason that people will never say what they really believe if they can be financially ruined as a consequence. In fact, if you look at the First Amendment, it says that “Congress shall make no law…” It says nothing beyond that. Thus, a good argument could be made that State governments do have the right to restrict freedom of speech because the Constitution says only “Congress shall make no law…” Such are the consequences of legal sophistries.

Politically correct assholes like you have made a fetish of free speech for decades. Over and over, you and others apply free speech to campus punks running around with “Fuck you” written on their foreheads in the 1960’s, to protestors screaming “Pig!” at the cops, to pornography when the concept of free speech was only meant to apply to ideas, not expressions of the sexual act, etc. That kind of “free speech”, no matter how vulgar and obscene, is praiseworthy. But when it comes to offending the all-powerful kike lobby by exposing their holy hoax then, by golly, free speech means that the livelihoods of those who commit heresy shall be destroyed because God’s Chosen People and their sycophants, like you, should not have to associate with such horrible types.

You have such a noble, logically consistent mind, meatball face’. Now go suck a Jew cock as the price of your daily bread.

You are such an amazing bullshit artist, Fang. Freedom of speech is distinguishable from the consequences of exercising that freedom. What crap. You can say anything you like – if you are willing to be destroyed in the marketplace for doing so. What kind of “right” is it that cannot be freely exercised? That is like saying that you have the “right” to walk down the streets of Oakland or Detroit at night – except that you might be mugged or killed because the worthless cops cannot protect public safety from criminals. Make the exercise of a right prohibitively risky and the right exists on paper only – not in the real world. It is a simple point – and therefore completely beyond your comprehension.

HITLER WAS RIGHT – THE REAL MESSAGE OF CHARLIE SHEEN

Charlie Sheen was fired from his TV show because he made mildly anti-Semitic comments about his Jewish producer, Charles Lorre/Levine. Charlie probably compounded his problem by denouncing the 09/11 official story. Although Charlie did not say it that too, was impliedly anti-Semitic because everyone who has studied the subject knows that 09/11 was an inside job by the Jews. Now, if a man can no longer hold a job because he expresses anti-Jewish views, then Jews must be running things. That means, in plain English, that Adolf Hitler was right.

Consider: If you criticize the President, the Democrats or Republicans, you will not be fired from your job. You can be for or against abortion, you can oppose or support illegal immigration to the United States. You can even argue, like Patrick Buchanan, that American entry into World War Two was a mistake. You can argue, like Charles Murray, that blacks are less intelligent than whites and stay within the bounds of intellectual respectability. But suggest that Jews are less than loveable individuals? Why, that is the kiss of death! All over the world individuals are having their careers destroyed for criticizing Jews. They are even being thrown into jail for questioning Jewish historical orthodoxies, like the Holocaust Hoax or for offending Jewish sensibilities under various “racial incitement” statutes.

No one can look at this blatant suppression of anti-Jewish criticism and avoid the conclusion that Jewish power rules the globe. The Jew controlled media refuse to state the proposition this blatantly, of course. That might provoke resentment and reaction. But no thinking individual, looking at the facts, can avoid the inescapable conclusion.

Employers, Fang The Wise tells us, have the right to dismiss those who hold unacceptable views. Clearly, Fang The Wise is a defender of the German Nazis. The Nazis, as the employers of the German nation, rightly regarded the Jews as a dangerous, subversive element in German society. They were the carriers of Communism and Weimar degeneracy. Therefore the Nazis fired the Jews from their jobs as German citizens and told them to go elsewhere for work.

The Nazis were only doing what Fang reccomends doing. After all, the Germans had every right not to associate with those whose views and behaviors they despised, just as whites have the right not to associate with biologically inferior blacks with their ten times higher crime rate. Freedom of association means freedom not to associate too, so Fang The Wise naturally repudiates Brown v. Board of Education and all other Supreme Court decisions that impose mandatory mingling with those who Fang wishes to avoid. (To reason otherwise would be gross logical inconsistensy in a man who thinks he recognizes inconsistensy in others.)

Winning arguments with Fang is like taking candy from the proverbial baby. Along with his side kick Ronnie, he really is “that stupid”.

http://www.ihr.org/jhr/v18/v18n3p-4_Weber.html

Well, well, you lying cocksucker. Micro wave delousing machines at Auschwitz to save lives. Don’t bother with your usual mocking of the source – try explaining the facts. You can’t, turd shit.

They are called quotation marks, John. They are not called paraphrase marks. An example of a paraphrase is; John said that he would like to have sex with a 12 year old girl in Spain. An example of a quotation is, “But if the day ever comes for “Payback” you pink, circumsized piece of greasy pork, I, and millions of other whites who finally know the truth, will hunt you down and nail your kosher ass to a crucifix with your amputated balls stuffed between your circumsized lips. You deserve it, and so do millions of others of your satanic tribe.”

John, the reason why I don’t give a shit to go look up your obscure quotes from obscure books is that you can’t even get the book names right. The book is not called Dark Times, Dire Consequences. Remember when you kept insisting that Between the Flag and the Banner was really called, “Behind The Banner and the Flag?” You even did it after you linked to the damned Amazon page of the book. How dumb was that?

You did it again. Why would I think that you got a quote right, when you can’t even get the name of the book right? Why would I think you got the quote right, when you can’t even quote this thread correctly? John, you’re a clown that does nothing but spew mistakes, and they are really stupid mistakes.

What kind of “right” is it

It’s the kind of right that shall not be infringed upon by the government. I am not the government, John. I don’t have to treat your bullshit as equal. Just what is it that you’re saying anyway? Are you saying that someone needs to be forced to employee Charlie Sheen no matter what he says? Are you saying that a business owner has no right to terminate employees that offend customers? You haven’t thought this through all the way, have you John?

Therefore the Nazis fired the Jews from their jobs

What an ironic choice of words. They fired them in ovens, John. They murdered them and then threw their corpses in ovens.

You just cannot think can you, Fang? You have presented no evidence whatever that the Nazis killed any Jews in “gas chambers” and then threw them in ovens. You simply assume it as a fact and then treat your assumption as a given, in defiance of all the evidence to the contrary. This makes you both a liar and a fool.

As to opinions offending customers, you have presented no evidence that Charlie Sheen alienated any viewers of the show. Where is the ratings drop? (I suspect that firing Charlie Sheen and replacing him with another actor will offend a lot of viewers and cause a ratings drop. This is not about protecting ratings, idiot, it is about protecting the Jews.) Besides, all opinions offend someone. As to freedom of speech being protected only from the government, that leaves unpopular opinions subject to private retaliation which makes a mockery of any genuine freedom of speech. This obvious point you completely ignore – just as you ignore all the facts that prove the extermination of the Jews a hoax.

In case you had not noticed, Jews wield enormous economic power in all societies. This “power of the purse” allows them to use economic pressure to suppress opinions they do not like and to impose intellectual conformity to their agendas. If you think that is a healthy thing thing, once agan, you are a fool. (A point that requires no demonstration.) Your attempted refutation of my analogy with the Nazis was pathetic. The Germans refused to associate with people they did not like by depriving them of their livelihoods, just as you reccomend doing to anti-Semites and Holocaust Deniers. Vive la difference, shit-for-brain.

Your nonsense about Joe Kuharic style malapropisms are equally off the mark. Your pretense that transposing a word in a title or substituting one word for another invalidates my research is sheer pretense and an evasion. Likewise with the sneering reference to rare books. The real problem is that the reference works by Jewish scholars do say what I claim – and that is the point you do not wish to address. The use of quotation marks also has nothing to do with the issue – and you know it. I am not writing here for publication; I am only making fools of two idiots who have no knowledge of any of the subjects they discuss. I therefore do not intend to go throught the tecium of looking up quotes I have read many times. I merely recite the essence of the quotation from memory and leave it at that. When I do take the time and trouble to give the quotations verbatim from the hundreds of reference works I possess, it only provokes complete silence anyway. Your asshole sidekick, Joseph Welch, has, to this day, not responded to the quotations I posted from the Fraenkel and Diner book, “Dark Times” or to the provable State Department Report. Neither will you because your goddamned quotation marks will not do you a bit of good if the writings are seriously examined. If you were a witness in a court case, Fang, no judge would tolerate your semantics for ten minutes. You would be designated a “hostile witness” and forced to respond under threat of jail time. That would mean that I could stand there all day, week after week, reading documented quotations and then handing you the book to prove it. Or, better yet, I could force you read the quotations while you otherwise had to keep your mouth shut. You would have nothing left to say after I destroyed you.

Now to return to that outmoded definition of “free speech” only being protected from the government. If a supplier were to threaten to cut off a contract from his buyer because that buyer had an employee whose opinions offended the suplier, I would have the suppliers balls cut off and handed to him. You make a big fetish about protecting the citizen from government restrictions of free speech but you obviously have no problem with using the government to force employers to hire approved minorities or to force racial integration upon unwilling whites. Thus, you apparently think that government dictate is bad in the one case but good in the others. As I’ve said before, you are a fucking idiot Fang.

“It shall be a violation of this statute to fire any employee because of an unpopular opinion, whether privately expressed or expressed on the job. It shall also be a violation of this statute to blacklist or attempt to blacklist any employee because of an unpopular opinion, whether privately expressed or expressed on the job. It matters not whether the opinion is personal or political in nature; nor does it matter whether the opinion expressed is racist, sexist or within or outside of the political mainstream, however defined. It shall be no defense that the opinion expressed may drive away business or jeopardize business relationships.

It shall also be a violation of this statute for any third party, such as a supplier or distributor or any other participant in the chain of commerce, to attempt to have someone else’s employee terminated through the exercise of commercial bargaining power. This includes but is not limited to threatening to cut off contracts to coerce the termination of an employee, suggestions to competitors to cease doing business with the firm employing the offending employee, threats to raise prices if the offending employee is not terminated and all such similar techniques. It shall further be a violation of this statute to copperate with any government, quasi-governmental or private news gathering organization to enforce any such termination or boycott of any offending individual.

It is the intent of this statute to provide absolute protection from any private retaliation against an employee for expressing any opinion, no matter how deeply offensive or unpopular in any circumstances whatever, publicly or privately, on the company’s time or off, personal or political, racial or sexual. No exceptions are permitted, either by this statute or by any subsequent judicial interpretation.

http://incogman.net/the-real-holocaust-deal/

The Holocaust made so simple that even idiots like Fang and Ronnie Stupids can understand it.

“It shall be a violation of this statute to fire any employee because of an unpopular opinion”

This, like so much other glurge you post, is a complete fabrication; pulled directly from your ass. Imagine if such a stupid law was put in place. McDonalds would hire people to seek employment at Burger King and then pay them to express the opinion that McDonald’s is superior to Burger King. Once employed, Burger king couldn’t fire them. Such a law completely tramples the employer’s right to determine whether an employee is satisfactory.

What a moron you are, John.

you obviously have no problem with using the government to force employers to hire approved minorities or to force racial integration upon unwilling whites. Thus, you apparently think that government dictate is bad in the one case but good in the others. As I’ve said before, you are a fucking idiot Fang.

Where did I make this obvious, you dipwad? I don’t recall ever stating a position on affirmative action.

If you do not understand that economic coercion is being used to stifle people’s freedom of expression, you can’t understand anything else – such as the self evident fact that the six million are a hoax. An employee’s suitability for a job is determined by whether he can perform the job, not by any opinion the employer might not like.

As always, you are a fucking idiot.

As opposed to your assumptions (fabrications, actually) that I fantasize about making it with twelve year old girls? Or as opposed to Ronnie Fuck’s assumption that I need a high school diploma when I already have a Bachelor of Arts? You’ve made plenty of assumptions of your own, asshole.

As to “stupid laws” we already have some on the books making it a criminal offense to doubt the six million fiction. You should compare those laws with my propsal which would limit employers from taking away people’s livelihoods to suppress genuine articulation of unpopular views.

As always, your brain is a fucking turd.

As opposed to your assumptions (fabrications, actually) that I fantasize about making it with twelve year old girls?

I didn’t fabricate anything, John. I don’t have to assume. You said it yourself, many times in many different ways. Here’s a sample:

john thames said
on 12 October 2009
Screwing 12-13 year olds is nature’s design and historically acceptable practice. Those are the facts, like them or not.

and in response to Ron’s post:

ron said
on 23 October 2009

In fact, I think it would be poetic justice for a nazi child predator like yourself to share a jail cell with the orthodox jewish child abusers in that article.

You said:

john thames said
on 23 October 2009

As long as I engage in dissident thoughts rather than proscribed actions, I am not a criminal.

Ron accused you, and you said as long as I only think about it, I’m not a criminal. This is you admitting that you fantasize about having sex with minors.

I on the other hand have made no comments on the subject of affirmative action at all. Your assumption is a straw man that you invented in your head. Like so much other stuff that you post here such as invented book titles, invented quotes, and fictional historical events.

As to “stupid laws” we already have some on the books making it a criminal offense to doubt the six million fiction.

What law do “we” have on the books that make it a criminal offense to doubt anything? None. Yet another thing that you fabricated out of whole cloth.

An employee’s suitability for a job is determined by whether he can perform the job, not by any opinion the employer might not like.

An employer’s standard for suitability is determined by the employer. Not by you or your stupid fantasy law. You’ve confused your natural right to thought and free speech to some invented right of employment. No such right exists. God, John. You sound like a friggan communist with that law.

Are you?

Are you a Jew?

Mr. Bullshit:

If employers do not have the right to ask women whether they intend to make babies on the company’s time, and thereby disrupt the workplace, then why do they have the right to impose a thought crimes test?

I never said I was fantasising about 12 year old girls; I merely made the valid distinction between fantasising and acting. More bullshit. Quite a few countries in Europe do indeed have laws against questioning the six million story. Or hadn’t you noticed? Also, these same European countries also have laws against firing employees over political views. Or didn’t you know?

Now for a change of pace.

COLUMBIA BROADCASTING BUTTOCKS

The media are bleeding profusely for poor Lara Logan, who had her ass grabbed on the streets of Cairo. But, in between the screams of “sexual assault”, real victims of sexual assault go unnoticed. Afghani women, darlings of the media, have the centuries old habit of hacking off the genitals of wounded soldiers after a battle. Contrast this form of sexual assault with the fate of poor Miss Logan, who suffered the infinitely greater ordeal of having her breasts and buttocks stripped and fondled on the streets of Cairo. Miss Logan is fortunate that she is a woman. Her immaculate posterior is more worthy of protection than the anus of white males sodomized by blacks behind prison bars. She only had to suffer a few minutes of paws on her love cheeks, as opposed to bending over on a daily basis.

Let us not deny Lara Logan her dignity. She suffered minor abuse but abuse that does not even begin to equal those who suffer far more outside the carefully focused indignation of the media lens.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rKKr-bHxjIA

It compares very favorably with what Ronnie and Fang deny.

More proof that Ronnie and Fang are liars.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mXuagX2xChI

If employers do not have the right to ask women whether they intend to make babies on the company’s time, and thereby disrupt the workplace, then why do they have the right to impose a thought crimes test?

I didn’t say employers have the right to impose a thought crimes test. I said that your stupid fantasy law tramples an employer’s right to determine if an employee is satisfactory, and is predicated on the notion of a right to employment. No such right to employment exists. The fact that you think it should exist makes you in the very least a socialist.

If an employer fires you because you say something stupid, that tramples none of your rights. You do not have the right to be employed. If your employer fires you because you’re a women then a right has been violated. An employer cannot discriminate on the basis of gender. If your employer fires you because you are black, then a right has been violated. An employer cannot discriminate on the basis of race. If your employer fires you because you are 50, then a right has been violated. An employer cannot discriminate on the basis of age over 40.

An employer interviews you so that he can discriminate on the basis of the things that come out of your stupid mouth. This is and should be perfectly legal. Once you’re hired you can’t go to your employer and say that you’re going to shoot everyone in the office and expect that your speech will be legally protected through the preservation of your job. That would be idiotic. Just like your stupid law.

I never said I was fantasising about 12 year old girls;

I actually accused you of wanting to have sex with 12 year old boys. So we’re still on the same page.

But I just don’t get why you would even bother denying the accusation. After all, you also fantasize about stuffing balls in people’s mouths. You fantasize about relationships with women in general. You fantasize about how much wealth you supposedly have. And last but not least you fantasize about murdering millions of people for their supposed crimes.

You really are off base on everything you write. If you knew anything about me (you don’t), you would know that I am one of the most vehemently anti-socialist types you will ever meet. I have absolutely no use for the doctrine. As for you, you know absolutely nothing about socialist doctrine. If you will take the trouble to read the socialist literature like I have, then you will learn that both racial equality and equal employment rights for women have been core socialist doctrine from day one.

Read either Marx, Engels, Kautsky, Lenin, Klara Zetkin or any other socialist author on the “woman question” and you will discover that they all endorsed the “liberation” of women into the job market, mandatory maternity leave so that women would not have to choose between career and family and all the policies that are currently wrongfully in effect. Anti-discrimination, racial equality statutes are also a core feature of socialist, particularly Marxist-Socialist, doctrine. The Communist Party, the ultimate advocates of socialism, advocated equal rights for Negroes in employment from the moment that the Communist Party, originally called the Workers Party until about 1928, was organized in America. Civil Rights were also devised by the Party in the 1920’s as part of their program for overthrowing the white social structure of the U.S. It might also interest you to know that the socialists were among the staunchest advocates of giving women the still unearned and undeserved right to vote. And, if you take the trouble to read John Lott’s researches, you will also discover that women and their votes were and still are the single biggest cause of the growth of socialism in the U.S. In every single state where women got the vote prior to the passage of the 19th amendment there was a virtual doubling of expenditures of state funds immediately thereafter.

In short, you brainless pseudo-libertarian horses ass, you are as completely unqualified to discuss socialism as you are utterly unqualified to discuss German labor camps during WW2. Now back to employment rights. You keep setting up straw men to knock down. The real issue here is not someone getting fired for using the “N” word. The issue is employers suppressing political dissent by making it clear that the price of a job is keeping your mouth shut on hyper-sensitive subjects. Your argument that nobody has a “right” to a job is Alice-in-Wonderland bullshit. In the modern world no one (other than the economically independent like me) can survive without a job. Whatever libertarian book taught you such bullshit isn’t worth reading. Saying that prohibiting employers from terminating employees over unpopular opinions is “Socialism” is like saying that restraint of trade laws are “Socialism”. It’s nonsense. Your understanding of Socialism does not go beyond knowing that Socialism advocates the public ownership of the means of production. As to the feminist and racial equality aspects of Socialist doctrine, you exist in total and abysmal ignorance (your normal state of intellectual vegetation).

Finally, it is the money I actually do possess and my sexual inclinations which are purely heterosexual. If I tell you to shove your balls down your throat, that merely means I’m telling you to fuck off; it does not express any desire to fuck your incredibly ugly face.

you would know that I am one of the most vehemently anti-socialist types you will ever meet.

That’s why you wrote a law that creates a right to employment.

If you will take the trouble to read the socialist literature like I have, then you will learn that both racial equality and equal employment rights for women have been core socialist doctrine from day one.

It’s also at the core of capitalist doctrine. The difference is in the concept of equality. Capitalists believe in equal opportunity. Socialists believe in engineered equality. Socialists engineer equality in the same way your stupid law tries to engineer an equality of ideas in the workplace. Your equality is engineered by limiting the power of the individual using the authority of government.

The real issue here is not someone getting fired for using the “N” word. The issue is employers suppressing political dissent by making it clear that the price of a job is keeping your mouth shut on hyper-sensitive subjects.

The “price of a job” is determined by a contract between an employer and an employee. Your stupid law notwithstanding, an employer should have every right to protect and administer the reputation and political standing of the business. It is the employer’s business, not the employee’s business. If the employer doesn’t want to project the image that it tolerates bullshit like yours, the employer should have every right to sanction your speech.

Saying that prohibiting employers from terminating employees over unpopular opinions is “Socialism” is like saying that restraint of trade laws are “Socialism”.

Man, you completely suck at paraphrasing too. I said that the belief in a right to employment is a socialist belief. Your law is predicated on the notion that termination on grounds that are based in “unpopular views” is a violation of a right to employment.

You don’t understand that do you?

You don’t have a right to stand in my front yard. If you stand in my front yard and spout your shit I can remove you from my front yard without violating your right to free speech. The same applies to a place of employment. You do not have a right to be employed. If you spout your shit at your office your employer has the right to remove you from the office without violating your right to free speech.

If you force the employer to keep employees in this circumstance, the law that does this is a socialist law. It’s that simple, John.

You’re a filthy fucking socialist.

Mr. College Punk:

It is obvious that you have never lived in the real world. You probably have not even graduated yet – and possibly never will. I suspect that you waste your time reading “The Fountainhead” and “Atlas Shrugged”, like I used to Your understanding of both freedom of speech and socialism is nil. Capitalism, prior to the 1964 Civil Rights law, never stood for either sexual or racial equality in the marketplace. Up until 1964, the economy functioned on the concept of family wage, which was the idea that companies should hire white men only and pay them a wage sufficient to support their wives and families. That is a documented fact of history, as I know because I was alive at the time, something that you probably were not.

The anti-discrimination law was promulgated by the same Jews who concocted the “gas chamber” hoax, just in case you had not noticed. I certainly do not believe in enforced equality of result as people are inherently unequal. Only a socialist believes in that. But you, the supposed advocate of capitalism, believe that the government should be allowed to dictate whether employers hire blacks or women. That is remarkable government coercion of an employers freedom of choice by a man who believes in no protection of opinions from private retaliation.

In short Fang, you are a jerk. As to the expression of opinions, employers can fire an employee if he writes a letter to a newspaper under his real name and the employer does not happen to like the view expressed. So the speech need not take place on the job. It seems to me that if employers can be forced to subsidize two legged cows reproducing on the company’s time, a function that obviously does not belong in any workplace, then they can also be forced to recognize the job security of those who express opinions of which they disapprove.

And since socialism bothers you so much, you might reflect, you terminal dick head, that socialism, as an idea marketable to the masses, was promulgated by the very Jews you adore. Everywhere in Europe from the 19th century to present, the socialist leaders oin all countries were Jews. Get Jack Jacob’s books on the subject, not to mention Jonathan Frankel’s and Norah Levin’s, and see if I am not absolutely right. I note that, as always, you did not try to rebut my assertions regarding the teachings of socialist doctrine, because you can’t.

The work place is privately run, surely. But the government overrides the employers rights in many ways. It forces the employer to hire minorities and women, thereby violating an employer’s right to hire who he chooses. It forces the employer to provide baby making vacations which violate the rights of the other employees who must do the extra labor. It mandates all sorts of vacations and other benefits that the employer might not choose to provide were the matter left to pure bargaining in the marketplace. Why, then, denounce as “socialist”, a law prohibiting the employer from doing what the government cannot? The answer is obvious to any one but a fucking idiot like you.

So to sum up, you admit to being a filthy fucking socialist.

Everywhere in Europe from the 19th century to present, the socialist leaders oin all countries were Jews.

Wrong again dummy.

Henri de Saint-Simon – (Christian)

Auguste Comte (secular humanist)

Charles Fourier….

This one’s the most ironic, John. Can you guess why? Not only did this guy start and support the feminist movement, but he also thought that the Jews were the source of all evil.

Sorry, Pizza Pig Face:

Although socialism started with the Fouriests, by the late nineteenth/ytwentieth centuries, socialism was everywhere a movement under the control of the Jews. Wrong as always, spaghetti head. Actually, I believe in the abolition of 90% of all government spending, the restoration of a 100% gold standard, the abolition of social security, the repeal of the income tax, the repeal of fraudulent fractional reserve banking and a host of other things that any rational mind (exlude yourself) would never characterize as socialist.

Shine a flashlight up your asshole.

FREE SPEECH

It was a habit of Franklin Roosevelt to refer to defenders of the Constitution as defenders of “horse and buggy” days. This writer has never been a fan of Franklin Roosevelt’s “New Deal”. But it is obvious that the First Amendment which only protects freedom of speech from governmental restriction, not employer retaliation, is indeed a product of “horse and buggy” days. People cannot afford to destroy their incomes or livelihoods as the price of expressing their real views. If people know that they will be fired or blacklisted if they offend powerful vested interests, they will keep their mouths shut as the price of survival. There are adolescent minds that will claim that the right to free speech does not exist on the job. They shall argue, in truly infantile fashion, that the fact that you have the right to your opinions does not give you the right to express said opinion on their front yard.

We shall begin by noting that professors in universities enjoy tenure which makes it impossible for them to be fired from their positions because someone might not like their researches or conclusions. “Academic freedom” is the idea that they should have the right to research and publish, without the fear of economic retaliation or career destruction, if their ideas prove unpopular. The taxpayers frequently do not like having to pay for the salaries of those who they believe are attacking their values and their way of life (which is indeed the case, in a great many instances). Nevertheless, the system is firmly established. No one thinks to ask why employees in the private labor market should not enjoy the same protection for the same reasons. It could be argued that a university where the development of ideas is the entire raison d’etre for its existence is distinguishable from a private enterprise where the primary function is the making of profit. Nevertheless, the principle of protecting unpopular views from economic and career destruction is still valid. If one objects that employers should not have to deal with employees whose views they detest, that is certainly no different than forcing taxpayers to pay the salaries of professors with whose views they disagree.

It is increasingly obvious that it is private economic power, not the government, that is the real threat to freedom of expression in these United States. Charlie Sheen, Mel Gibson, Rick Sanchez, Helen Thomas, Oliver Stone and many others, have had their freedom of expression curtailed and their careers destroyed, not by the government, but by a subversive, alien, nation-within-the-nation. This alien nation called Jewry is the real threat to freedom of speech within these United States. It is this ethnic monopoly on “acceptable opinion” that is the real issue. That is the issue which minds that focus on childish distinctions between the government and private behavior seek to evade.

HISTORICAL CAUSALITY

It is rather amusing to listen to various pundits claim that the current antagonism between Islam and the west is merely a resurgence of an ancient historical struggle of the Dark Ages. This is rather like the English propaganda of WW1 which argued that the invasion of Belgium of 1914 was the re-emergence of the Teutonic “wolf” that had leaped out of the Teutoburg forest to destroy the Roman legions. It is nonsense, of course. Historical continuity does not extend over centuries. (The only exception is the Jews, whose hatred of the non-Jewish world has continued, unabated, from the ancient to the present.)

Islam is actually at war with Zionism which has, and continues, to make war on the Arabs of Palestine. Sine the United States, under Jewish control, continues to support Israel, naturally the U.S. irritates the Islamic world. The Jews, in order to prevent the American public from realizing this truth, have concocted a hoax of a vast Islamic “war with the west”. The only element in this that has any truth is that there is a vast Islamic immigrant invasion of Europe. (The Jews, of course, never admit that they tore down the “whites only” immigration laws that let them in.) Thus, the same Jews who scream about the threat of Islam simultaneously let the Moslems in. This is all so ludicrous that one can only marvel at the stupidity of the Americans who fall for it.

Pizza Pig Face:

O but I do know o great propounder of riddles! You refer, most obviously, to that well-known liberal of Victorian England, John Stuart Mill, who decried the “eye for an eye” morality of the Jews at the same time he licked pussy for female suffrage. That did not even require any internet research.

Do better, bozo brain.

Fourier was also a flaming anti-Semite, shit head.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=n4EfufBl1cU

Is he right or is he right? The quotes are accurate – like mine.

THE FIX IS IN

Walter Duranty was, of course, the New York Times journalist who lied through his teeth about the Ukrainian famine of 1932-1933 in which seven to ten million people were deliberately starved to death by Joseph Stalin and his Jewish gulag commissars. Duranty is seen by some as a journalistic aberration; he is seen by others as the prototype of the modern “politically correct” journalist. All journalists are essentially Walter Duranty clones. Regardless of whether they are conservative or liberal, right or left wing, all journalists serve essentially the same Jewish-Zionist interests. There are many indications of this. One of the most blatant is the insistence that Israel is always in the right or that it always acts in self defense. But there are many others. The media consistently attack the idea that America is a white country for white people. They constantly promote the cause of minorities and blacks in particular. They do this at the same time that they sing the praises of the hyper-ethnocentric state of Israel in which Arabs are treated as dirt. Another tip off of an alien agenda at work is the constant harping on the Holocaust, the alleged extermination of six million Jews by purported “gas chambers”. This obsession with the Holocaust is matched by an absolute refusal to investigate or discuss the Jewish origins of Communism.

Reporters are almost duty bound, as the price of a paycheck, to promote the doctrines of racial and sexual equality. No sustained, objective discussion of the evidence for greater white intelligence over black intelligence is permitted. At most, an occasional guest shall be permitted to argue this thesis, only to be mocked and derided. Women are always to be portrayed as victims of “sex discrimination” ignoring that almost all real discrimination in America is in favor of women. Thus, no one shall be permitted to point out that women come first in divorce court, that women enjoy automatic custody of children, that women enjoy exemption from combat duty or that women get first place on the life boats.

Reporters unswervingly accept the line that America has a sworn duty to police the world. A retreat into “isolationism” or, more properly, neutrality, is unthinkable. Only a Patrick Buchanan is permitted as token opposition to this kind of thinking. The fix is in. The media are following a Party line, and the Party line is, in all cases, the Zionist Party line.

COMMISSARS OF THE SCIMITAR

According to Zionist propaganda, the Arabs are terrorizing the Jews. Every day the Arabs fire deadly rockets at the Jews from Gaza and perpetrate suicide bombings. No wonder the poor Jews are so traumatized. But, in this age of short historical memory, there once was a far more deadly abuse of Jews by Arabs. In the heyday of Communism, the Grand Mufti of the Kremlin, Haj Amin al-Stalin, terrorized the poor Jews with his Arab commissars. Saintly “scientific socialist” types with names like Reichmann, Spiegelglass, Solts, Berman, Fraenkel, Firin, Rottenberg, Kaganovich, Yagoda, Sverdlov, Levitan and thousands of others were ruthlessly starved and worked to death by conscienceless commissars of the scimitar. And while the Prince Alis and Auda Abu Tay’s of the gulags were doing their murderous work, what did the Islamo-Fascists of the western media say? Why, they offered nothing but praise. The Grand Mufti of Communism, Dear “Uncle Joe”, was creating a wondrous new world by putting Jewish commissars where they belonged – in hideous death camps.

Walter Wahabi of the Sand Dune Times denied that there was any Kiev Ghetto famine. There were only Jews living off of diminishing dividends, as admitted by Goldman Schmucks in its five year stock report. This horrible mass murder of Jews by Arab Communists has been hidden by a hoax of Zyklon B geysers in the Jordanian desert. The “Fumes of Arabia” are more deadly than the firecrackers of Gaza.

http://books.google.com/books?id=4oJUKoN-oIwC&pg=PA167&lpg=PA167&dq=charles+fourier+on+jews&source=bl&ots=2p34E2lXIh&sig=sbAm1TQ-V43MpMETp82NXdLfLTY&hl=en&ei=VLJ9TYjrOo7trAGpz-2MBg&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=5&ved=0CD0Q6AEwBA#v=onepage&q=charles%20fourier%20on%20jews&f=false

Ho, ho, ho, master of spaghetti sauce scholarship! Fourier proposed letting only one in fifty Jews engage in commerce. How very “National Socialist” of him. I have no use for socialism and regard Fourier as an idiot but he was right that Jewish commercial stranglehold can can cause a problem for any society that allows it to develop. Maybe we need Henry Ford style capitalism for whites and gulags for kikes.

http://www.amazon.com/Jewish-Socialist-Movements-1871-1917-Civilization/dp/0838631517

Here is where you can find some facts to help your ignorant, uninformed scribbling, Pizza brain. We all know how you hate reading and research. It isn’t nearly as much fun as pretending that you know what you are talking about. In fact, it takes many hours of reading, cross-comparing and analysis. Not your style, obviously.

P.S.

Mixing stupidity with pasta produces brains like yours.

THE VETO OF POWER

Recently, the entire world at the United Nations voted to condemn Israel’s illegal and prolonged occupation of Arab land. The United States, standing alone, vetoed the resolution. What does the United States know that the rest of the world does not? Why, nothing. The U.S. has no factual rebuttal to the resolution. The illegality of the occupation has never been questioned. The U.S. is doing the bidding of power. Zionist power controls the U.S. as surely as the Jewish commissars once ruled Soviet Russia. Barack Obama, a man who is known to privately oppose Israel’s policies of occupation, had to swallow and bow down to the dictates of his backers. Those with long memories may recall that when the choice between Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton for the Democratic nomination was being decided, the Chicago Daily News published a debate on whether Obama could be trusted to serve Israel’s interests. The minority view was that he was pro-Palestinian and could not be trusted. The majority view, now proven correct, was that when crunch time arrived, Barack Obama would serviley obey his masters.

Barack Obama’s veto should bring a cynical smile to the lips of ex-president Jimmy Carter. Here we have absolute proof of what Carter and every other retired politician of both the left and right have said for decades –that Israel totally controls the U.S. government. The Middle East is in an uproar over decades of U.S. and Zionist misrule. In the midst of this revolutionary upheaval, what does the U.S. do? It sides with the Zionist traitors who are the cause of all U.S. woes and misfortunes in the Arabian peninsula. The United States government has openly proclaimed itself the whore of Zion.

Everywhere in Europe from the 19th century to present, the socialist leaders oin all countries were Jews.

Poor John. When you get made a fool of your only recourse is to move the goal posts.

by the late nineteenth/ytwentieth centuries, socialism was everywhere a movement under the control of the Jews.

Vladimer Lenin
Joseph Stalin
Mao Tse-Tung
Kim Il Sung
Kim Jung Il
Hugo Chavez

Dummy…

I believe in the abolition of 90% of all government spending, the restoration of a 100% gold standard, the abolition of social security, the repeal of the income tax, the repeal of fraudulent fractional reserve banking and a host of other things that any rational mind (exlude yourself) would never characterize as socialist.

You also believe that someone is entitled to their employment regardless of how they comport themselves while operating as an agent of their employer. This makes you a filthy fucking socialist.

Fourier was also a flaming anti-Semite, shit head.

Yeah…Just like you he was a flaming socialist anti Semite shit head. He’s a great example of how “Everywhere in Europe from the 19th century to present, the socialist leaders oin all countries were Jews.” Isn’t he? I mean, now that you’re a socialist and all have you suddenly seen the light or something? You seem to be arguing my point.

Recently, the entire world at the United Nations

Heh. If it’s the security council resolution I think you’re talking about you mean 15 countries instead of the entire world.

The United States, standing alone, vetoed the resolution.

The U.S. once again adhered to the Negroponte Doctrine, which has little to do with being directed by Jews, and more to do with diplomacy that recognizes the Muslims are just as much to blame for the situation. This doctrine requires that all resolutions regarding the conflict have elements that contain:

* A strong and explicit condemnation of all terrorism and incitement to terrorism;
* A condemnation by name of the al-Aqsa Martyrs’ Brigade, Islamic Jihad and Hamas, groups that have claimed responsibility for suicide attacks on Israel;
* An appeal to all parties for a political settlement of the crisis;
* A demand for improvement of the security situation as a condition for any call for a withdrawal of Israeli armed forces to positions they held before the September 2000 start of the Second intifada Palestinian uprising.

If it doesn’t have that the U.S. will veto. Of course, John conveniently left out the fact that the U.S. government called the settlements illegitimate on their own.

http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/hillary-clinton-israeli-settlements-illegitimate/story?id=12952834

A CASE STUDY IN THAT WHICH DOES NOT EXIST

A professor Jeffrey Herf in Chicago promotes the line that any idea of Jewish ethnic solidarity across national lines is a myth. One wonders how professor Herf reconciles this thesis with certain well known facts. Let’s examine just one episode inconsistent with his thesis. Prior to the creation of the state of Israel American Zionists organized a vast arms smuggling operation on behalf of the Jewish underground in Palestine. This operation was transcontinental in scope, involving Jews of many different ideologies in many countries, united only by ethnicity and Zionism and manipulating governments all over the world. Let us examine how it was done.

The operation began with a meeting of prominent American Jews in New York City. The number was only about fifteen. One, however, was the extremely influential Rabbi Abba Hillel Silver, the chief advisor to Senator Robert A. Taft of Ohio. These men decided that the Jewish nation hood movement had to be supported by arms and munitions from America. They organized to that end. One of their stratagems was to buy large quantities of WW2 army surplus. Prominent Jews in the sheet metal business and related industries began acquiring machine guns and ammunition either by buying it or stealing it. The next problem was how to ship the material to Palestine in violation of American export laws. Various methods were employed. Many arms shipments were packed within carpet roles or fruit cases and shipped as “freight”. Unions, dock workers and public officials were corrupted, bought off or intimidated. Unconfirmed allegations have been made that J. Edgar Hoover and the FBI were co-opted into the operation. A particular problem was how to fly the supplies to Palestine. The Zionists conceived the idea of registering planes they had purchased in America in Panama to avoid American export restrictions.

This necessarily involved the cooperation of various South American governments. This was achieved by both economic and political contacts. Samuel Zemmaray, the chief share holder of the gigantic United Fruit Company, was very influential in this process. So was the dictator, Antonio Somoza of Nicaragua, who agreed to provide aircraft and bases for flying transports overseas. On the diplomatic front, South American politicians provided invaluable support to the Zionists. The president of the General Assembly of the United Nations, Aranha of Brazil, was a Zionist agent. When the United Nations were debating the partition of Palestine resolution of November 1947, it was president Aranha who delayed the final vote on the resolution several times so that the Zionists could coerce the necessary votes to obtain passage of the resolution. Garcia Granados, the president of Guatemala, provided similar services to the Zionists as documented in his book, “The Birth of Israel”.

The Zionists needed a base in Europe to transport the arms to Israel-in-the-making. Transatlantic flights to Palestine were simply too long to consider. They found their allies in the Communists of Czechoslovakia. With the approval of Joseph Stalin, the Czech Communists agreed to train Zionist pilots and provide them with high quality captured German Messerschmidts. The planes were then refueled in Communist Yugoslavia under the direction of a Mr. Joseph Korbel and then flown to Palestine to attack the Arabs. (Mr. Korbel later came to America and established an institute for international studies in Denver, Colorado where two future U.S. Secretaries of State, Condoleezza Rice and Madeline Korbel/Albright were trained. The Zionist international does get around.)

Back in America, the Zionists were extremely busy. Jews like Mickey Cohen, the L.A. Jewish mobster, Mr. Greenberg, the Las Vegas newspaper editor, Jewish casino owners, Lyndon Johnson and his friend Jim Novy and many, many others were funneling arms, munitions and money to the Jewish underground. Former camps for German prisoners of war, like the camp in Oswego New York were used as training grounds for Zionist troops to fight the Arabs. This amazing activity, which included the Jewish community in America, the corruption of the U.S. government, the recruitment of South American governments, the corruption of the United Nations, the assistance of the Soviet Communists and the help of Jews all over the world in pursuit of an ethnic agenda, leads to only one conclusion. Jews are indeed an international community, bound by ties of blood – and no denial by professor Jeffrey Herf shall alter that fact.

More drivel from a man who thinks through his asshole.
The Soviet Union, the worlds foremost example of socialism, was created and staffed overwhelmingly by Jews. The theoreticians of socialism throughout Europe were overwhelmingly Jewish. Edward Bernstein, the founder of gradualist Masrxism in Germany, Karl Kautsky in Austria, Marx, Ferdinand Lassalle,Abraham Cahan and the Jewish Socialist “Forward” in New York , Adler in Austria, on and on it goes. If one looks at socialism in Russia, the leading names were Moses Hess, Chaim Zhitlovsky, Dov Ber Borochov, Aaron Lieberman, John Mill (not the more famous one in England, a Jew despite his name), Vladimir Medem, the chief theoretician of the Bund, the one-quarter Jewish Vladimir Lenin (grandfather named Blank), Martov, Theodore Dan, M.I. Lieber, etc.

Socialism in America was primarily promoted by Jews as well. The fact that Eugene Debs was not a Jew does not refute the point. It is also true that the foreign language sections of the the Socialist Party also contribute a fair number of members. But none of that gets around the fact that socialism, as an ideology, has always been duirected by New York Jews. Get Tony Michels “A Fire in Their Hearts” if you do not believe it. You can also try reading Gerald Sorin’s “The Prophetic Minority” for confirmation.

The bullshit about the U.N. veto is precisely that. The U.S. has been vetoing anti-Zionist resolutions at ake Success for decades. This is just more of your pettifogging dialectics. You never can argue anything substantive. I never argued that an employer had no right to terminate an employe. If the employee is perpetually absent, tardy, does not follow direction, defecates in his seat, spends all day in the bathroom, etc, of course the employer has the right of dismissal. What I did say is that no employer should have the right to take way a livelihood because of the expression of an unpopular opinion. If you think that is “socialism”, I will only say that since you do not know who foisted socialism on the world, you naturally would not know anything about socialist doctrine either.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jewish_left

Here is a sufficient indictment of your nonsense that socialism was not a predominantly ewish movement. Continue to spew your epithets. It shall do you no good.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jewish_right

Here is a sufficient indictment of your nonsense that socialism was predominantly ewish movement. Continue to spew your epithets. It shall do you no good

IS A.I.P.A.C. THE NEW BIROBIDZHAN COMMITTEE?

Students of things Jewish shall recall the organization called Ambijan, the American Birobidzhan Committee. Created in 1934, it was designed to promote Birobidzhan, the Jewish autonomous Region in Siberia. It was extremely influential and raised large sums of money in the 1930’s and 1940’s to promote Stalin’s “Palestine in Siberia”. American politicians on both the national and local levels frequently appeared as speakers and lavished glowing praise on Birobidzhan, much as American politicos lavish similar praise on the state of Israel today, and for similar reasons. Birobidzhan was to solve the “Jewish problem” and create a wonder land free of anti-Semitism and glorious, emancipated Jewish nationality. A few choice quotations from Henry Felix Srebrnik’s “Dreams of Nationality: American Jewish Communists and the Soviet Birobidzhan Project, 1924-1951” should illustrate the point.

“Senator Claude Pepper addressed those in attendance at the November 21 (1948) annual dinner. He predicted that Birobidzhan would soon become an autonomous republic with a Jewish majority, ‘which will reflect their character, genius and their dreams’ He urged the delegates to ‘keep up your great fight; continue your great work; hold on to your old and strong faith.’ Finally, he praised the Soviet Union as ‘a nation which has recognized the dignity of all people’, as ‘a nation wherein discrimination against anybody on account of race is a crime’ and as a nation ‘in fundamental sympathy with the progress of mankind’. (p.41)Z

When, in 1936, the Soviet Union decided to allow 1,000 Jewish families outside the country to immigrate to Birobidzhan, Jewish leaders and their sycophants in America were most enthusiastic. Congressman Emmanuel Celler of New York enthused that it “will be the beginning of a movement that will help tens of thousands of Jews to find a haven of refuge.” These Jews will be taken out of their misery and transferred to a country where they will enjoy economic security and equality of opportunity.” They would have self-government and the use of their own language, Yiddish. “Never in the history of the world has such a glorious opportunity been offered to the Jews.” Samuel Levy, the Manhattan borough president, stated his gratification at the lack of anti-Semitism in the Soviet Union, and added that Ambijan’s cause was “deserving of the support of every American.”

Vito Marcantonio, who represented the 20th Congressional district of East Harlem for the CP-influenced American Labor Party (ALP), also chimed in: In a radio address he delivered over WHN on August 22, 1936, Marcantonio expressed his admiration “for the splendid way in which Russia has solved its problem of racial and national minorities.” There was, he stated, “absolute equality” for all peoples of the Soviet Union, and it is especially gratifying to know that there is no anti-Semitism in present day Russia.” (p.41)

Anyone can compare these breathtakingly absurd statements of long ago with the equally absurd statements of praise of Israel today. Just as the Jewish commissars of the 1930’s were abolishing anti-Semitism and creating paradise on earth, so too Israel is creating “democracy” in the Middle East. The Zionist state is making the desert bloom the same way that Birobidzhan made Siberia flourish with “scientific socialism”. The politicians fall all over themselves to praise Israel the same way they fell all over themselves to praise Stalin’s Russia. The reader will note the repeated references in the quotations to the elimination of anti-Semitism in Russia. This forms an amazing contrast to the post-1970’s propaganda that Communism was “persecuting” the Jews. Clearly, something does not fit. Communism once was very good for the Jews it – it eliminated anti-Semitism. What happened? What happened is that Communism cannibalized its leading ethnic minority. Until that happened Communism was beloved by Jews.

To read the history of the old Birobidzhan Committee is to realize that the force which rules the world merely changed its base of operations. Pledging allegiance to Israel has replaced swearing allegiance to scientific socialism. But the faces of the Zionist commissars are exactly the same.

The bullshit boys are deadly silent. Documented facts are too much for them.

STALINIST SPEECH CODES

America is awash in speech and behavior codes that are essentially Stalinist. Every corporation and business now has mandatory seminars in thought, speech and behavior training. They call it “hostile environment” and “sexual harassment” training. What it really is is Party line indoctrination under the camouflage of concocted legal concepts. The origin of these concepts is very interesting. Most people will tell you that these concepts date back to the 1964 Civil Rights Act. That was the initial enabling act, surely. But the concepts actually go back further than that. In 1943 a Polish-Jewish lawyer named Rafael Lemkin published a book, “Axis Rule in Occupied Europe” by the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace. This book marked the first appearance of genocide as a legal concept. Most people think of genocide as the deliberate mass murder of a group of people. But that is not how Lemkin defined the term.

Lemkin spends the greater part of his book essentially describing genocide as the ancient art of denationalization. Thus, he goes on at interminable length describing German restrictions on Jewish culture, German expropriation of Jewish property, German deportation and segregation of the Jews, etc. Nowhere, however, does he define genocide as mere mass murder. Quite the contrary. He makes it explicit that mass killing conducted for purely political reasons (eliminating “enemies of the state”, as in Soviet Russia, for example) would not constitute genocide. Genocide is something more and something less. Genocide involves causing harm to minorities based on their ethnicity. The harm need not be physical but merely mental or emotional. Thus, abolishing Jewish culture or calling a Jew by the “K” word would constitute genocide but mass murder of enemies of the socialist state by Jewish commissars would not constitute genocide.

Genocide, thus defined, becomes a very elastic and self-serving concept, ideally constituted to class war fare. In particular, it is ideal for overthrowing a formerly dominant majority white population by prohibiting criticism or opposition to the legally favored minorities which are to displace them. Anyone can research Lemkin’s clever formula and see in it the germs of all that has come since. It was most assuredly not an accident that Lemkin was a Jew and an opponent of Adolf Hitler. That is why his genocide concept is never applied against his fellow Zionists and their literal denationalization of the Palestinian Arabs.

So socialism isn’t Jewish, is it? Note in particular the hundreds of thousands of Jews in the Jewish People’s Committee and the Jewish Labor Committee.

http://www.come-and-hear.com/dilling/chapt11.html

Time to declare victory. The bullshit boys have run out of rebuttals.

Heil He Who Knows All!

Heil He Who Knows All!

Megalomania is defined as: [1]

1. A psychopathological condition characterized by delusional fantasies of wealth, power, or omnipotence.

Megalomania is a behavioral characteristic where a person has delusional superfluous thoughts of being wealthy or powerful or when one thinks that he is a genius or omnipotent. Megalo in Greek means “large”, something very grand. Mania means obsession.

Megalomania hence means the self estimation of having achieved enormous social or political or corporate influence, or having acquired wealth and grandeur. It is a psychological state of a person.

To be precise, Megalomania is a preoccupied thought and representation of one’s dreams in real life. What one actually tries to achieve in life is prematurely expressed in a manner that one has already achieved it. It is also termed as delusion of grandeur.

Megalomania is a dangerous psychological disease. And this disease ruins one own self. A person suffering from megalomania which is almost equal to paranoid schizophrenia tries to maintain an inflated status in the society. He thinks that he is a well acclaimed personality in the society and that every body must honor him for his deeds. Megalomaniacs usually try to take shortcuts to their success. They dream to become one of the most popular figures in the world and hence try to reach that goal in the shortest possible way. During this process, the individual tends to maintain the standard that he has not reached yet and looses everything that he has presently.

Megalomania is an illusion and is an ego which is often ridiculed. It can also be termed as Narcissism or can be considered a part of Narcissism. Narcissism in psychology means love with one self, self appreciation and self admiration. This also means that a Megalomaniac has higher than normal love for himself. This abnormal narcissism can be called as malignant narcissism.
A megalomaniac over estimates his capabilities and hence usually turns out to be a failure.

John, any dead silence on the part of people willing to converse with you is more likely due to the lack of interest in your obsession, rather then an inability to demonstrate to a rational mind that you are insane.

You do know that you’re crazy right? You do realize that you’re ranting on a website that hasn’t been updated in almost 19 months now? In what capacity do you really think you’ve declared victory?

Of course I’m crazy – because you say so. And if I’m really so crazy and as irrelevant as you pretend, why the driving desire to debate me?After all, if it were really the nonsense you claim, you wouldn’t be responding.

No, pizza face bus boy. You fear the truth. People are increasingly reading this kind of material and are learning how they’ve been lied to. Calling me “crazy” ain’t gonna stop it.

In re “being a failure”. Do you have ten million behind you?

LOSER.

In re “megalomania”:

Does that apply to “Black Jesus” presidents who think they can solve everything while solving nothing? Or does it even apply to Pizza faces who think they know something when they can’t even research elementary historical facts?

I don’t need megalomania; all I neeed is my research library.

And now for a little fun with Mr. Pizza Face. Pizza Face loves to quibble about quotations. So let’s give him one from Harvey Klehr’s well-known volume (although not to Pizza Face obviously), “Communist Cadre: The Social Background of the American Communist Party Elite”. The quotation is from page 50. It reads:

“”A variety of facors help to account for the compartvely large number of Jews who were attracted to Communism – for example, the conditions of Jewish life both in Tsarist Russia and in the slums of the Lower East Side of New York, and the transfer of Jewish messianic hopes to a secular substitute.”

Gee, isn’t this what I have been saying repeatedly?

People are increasingly reading this kind of material and are learning how they’ve been lied to

Too bad your delusions won’t allow you to see the abject irony of this statement.

What a sad miserable life it must be; the dedication to an obsession with hatred. And, John, the “ten million” behind you are figments; the phantom playthings of your twisted fantasy.

You no more control them then you control your compulsion to argue about Jews on a 2 year old blog post.

Pizza Face:

Why don’t you get a job at Domino’s for $8 an hour? I don’t think you can make it as a shrink. By the way, did you just make 500% in the silver market? I did.

LOSER

Pizza Face:

Have you tried hating Arabs in Israel? It should relieve you from hating me.

THE WARREN COMMISSION LEARNED IT FROM THE NUREMBERG COURT

As everybody knows, the Warren Commission rewrote the laws of physics with its magical “single bullet” theory. This bullet did things never seen before or since. It changed directions and went through bones and marrow without leaving a dent on the casing or shell. It was also fired from an inferior gun with a bad sight by a lousy marksman with pin-point accuracy. It left major holes as entrance wounds and minor holes as exit wounds. This bullet was truly marvelous. But let no one think that the fabulous “single bullet” was unique. It was not. Its prototype, the “gas chambers” of Adolf Hitler, were even more fabulous. Those gas chambers were built underground at Auschwitz. This greatly facilitated the dispersal of the gas which is usually dealt with by building the gassing facility above ground. Then too, the “gas chambers” were not properly sealed or ventilated. They had no means of heating the gas to the necessary temperature for dispersal. And the room was not even big enough to hold the claimed number of victims. Hardly any trace of Zyklon B “Prussian Blue” residue can be found in the chambers where millions of Jews were supposedly killed. Why, it is enough to make JFK’s head explode a second time.

The Warren Commission managed to ignore all kinds of evidence from witnesses who saw shots coming from the grassy knoll, rather than the Texas Book Depository building. They overlooked evidence that Oswald was actually employed as an agent by the FBI. And they managed to rewrite witness statements to make the original statements mean what the Commission wanted them to say. They would not let Jack Ruby tell what he knew although Ruby badly wanted to talk. And, of course, they let the Dallas police Department do its own investigation of who let Ruby into the basement of the Dallas police headquarters to shoot Ruby. Naturally, the Dallas Police concluded that Ruby, a man with deep connections to hundreds of officers in the Department, got in all by himself.

It was all very innovative. Now, where did the Warren Commission learn these investigatory techniques? Why, at Nuremberg obviously! At Nuremberg hardly an original German document was introduced. All the documents were “certified copies of copies”. Genuine German documents of the Auschwitz camp were carted off by the Soviet Union and concealed from the tribunal. Thus, the Jews testifying to “gassings” at the tribunal did not have to explain the German records that showed only about 150,000 deaths of all causes at the camp (only a percentage of which were Jews).They were not confronted by the fact that the Zyklon B used at the camp was used to control typhus epidemics by killing typhus bearing lice or the fact that the that the crematory ovens were there to burn bodies that died of disease. Heinrich Himmler’s order that the “death rate in the camps was to be reduced at all costs” was, of course, not introduced. No one performed any forensic tests of the alleged “gas chambers”. (That was only done fifty years later.) Genuine German records showing that German policy was to deport the Jews to the occupied territories in the east were suppressed. So too, was Adolf Hitler’s dictum that he wanted “the Jewish question shelved until the end of the war”. The fact that the Communist governments being imposed on Eastern Europe after the war was 75% Jewish was not mentioned at Nuremberg. After all, was it conceivable that the Jews supposedly being exterminated were actually hiding out east of the Ural Mountains during the war? A Jewish newspaper in Sweden during the war claimed that 50-75% of Russia’s Communist Jews had been evacuated eastward before the Wehrmacht arrived. This newspaper was naturally not quoted by the prosecution at Nuremberg.

The Nuremberg Court, like the Warren Commission, arrived at the conclusions it wanted to reach. This process was aided and abetted by the fact that 2400 out of the 3000 total personnel behind the scenes at Nuremberg were Jews. Robert Jackson, Francis Biddle, Sir Hartley Shawcross and others were merely the front men for the real orchestrators of the kangaroo court. It was rather like the Warren Commission, where the presence of Allen Dulles was to help cover up the involvement of U.S. intelligence agencies in the president’s murder. Earl Warren, the man who was responsible for the round up and internment of Japanese-Americans in World War Two, was the Robert Jackson of the Warren Commission. The German defendants at Nuremberg were hung during the Jewish high holidays in October between the Day of Atonement and the Day of Final Judgment. They were ritually executed, just like Lee Harvey Oswald was ritually sacrificed to a pre-determined verdict and judgment.

The Kennedy assassination has generated an enormous literature disagreeing with the obviously doctored official conclusion. But the literature disproving the kangaroo court at Nuremberg is still very much underground. It is read privately by those deathly afraid of career destruction if they are found out. But the deniers of the mythical six million and the deniers of the mythical single bullet have something in common, nonetheless. Both are seekers after truth. And the truth, surprisingly enough, is the same in both cases. The real killers of John Kennedy were they who concocted the hoax of the “gas chambers”. And the motive, in both cases, was the same – to promote the interests of the emerging, and later extant, state of Israel. But that is another story for another essay.

Hey, Pizza face. If you like my latest creation, I’ll buy you a foreskin flavored topping.

Before you ask me where I would get foreskin flavored pizza toppings, let me just say I know the guy down at Rizzo’s Pizza. He owes me a favor or two and the guy is simply a genius when it comes to homosexually themed pizza ingredients.

Let me tell you; his foreskin toppings taste exactly like the real thing.

I should know.

Ronnie’s failed career as a satirist again How boring.

FACT THERAPY

Americans are rushing to mental health care professionals in ever greater numbers. But what Americans really need is not mental therapy, but fact therapy. Mental therapy solves nothing. In truth, it frequently makes the patient even more screwed up. But fact therapy is extremely therapeutic. A patient who undergoes fact therapy learns to look at the world with clear eyes. He does not need anyone to tell him what to think because the facts tell him everything. A person with fact therapy laughs at media commentators lying through their teeth. Who needs them?

Fact therapy will show you the faces of the Jewish commissars the TV set never told you about. Fact therapy will show you the Arab farms and villages that the Zionists say never existed in Palestine. Fact therapy will show you the truth on fake “gas chambers” and a mythical six million. Fact therapy is the key to an unknown universe. Once you learn the facts you will learn everything the powers-that-be do not want you to know. The next time you are feeling confused do not go to Dr. Freud with a prescription from Oprah Winfrey. Let Der Fuehrer massage your mind with verboten facts instead. You will never watch Dr. Phil again.

IN THE WOMB OF ZION

Nothing is more informative than reading Jewish scholars clarify the very issues that the Jew media specialize in confusing. Thus, the media that promote the myth of anti-Semitism in Soviet Russia always use Soviet anti-Zionism to “prove” their case. An excellent reference work on this little understood subject is “Communism and Zionism in Palestine: The Comintern and the Political Unrest in the 1920’s” by Jacob Hen-Tov published in 1974. The essential conflict between Communism and Zionism (both Jewish movements) is laid out with remarkable clarity by Hen-Tov on pp.67-68 of his study.

“In the preceding chapters, the focus has been on the intricate relationship between the Comintern and the Zionist settlement in Palestine as reflected in the unique political background of the Comintern’s Jewish Communist cadres and in the special role they played in the elaborate network of the Comintern’s front organizations. As noted Palestine received more than its proportionate share of the Comintern’s attention in the area, for reasons having to do with the internal political situation of the Soviet Union. In the Comintern’s thinking, Zionism in Palestine, irrespective of its economic and political strength, was psychologically linked with the unresolved Jewish question in Russia and with the strong sense of national identity (though not always affiliated with Zionism) that prevailed among the Jewish masses.

Zionism in Palestine, therefore, was not merely viewed as a local nationalist movement whose revival took place in some remote corner of the globe, but rather its development was viewed as a viable, relevant, and potentially quite dangerous issue linked directly to the very heart of the Soviet system.

In its struggle against Zionism in Palestine, the Comintern had at its disposal an extensive system of Communist front organizations, as well as a local Communist Party Organization, predominantly Jewish (much to the dislike of the Comintern’s bosses). Its elites of revolutionary cadres, who were primarily Jewish and ex-Zionists, for personal, political, and ideological reasons, zealously carried out their anti-Zionist mission, in a frequently committed, dedicated and violent manner, surpassing, in all probability, any conceivable non-Jewish Communist anti-Zionist activity. As Professor L. Schapiro has observed:

“In general, Jewish Party members were as much if not more opposed to the fostering of Jewish nationalism and to Zionism than non-Jewish members.”

In addition, as previously pointed out, the Comintern had the benefit of the help rendered whole-heartedly by the Yevsektsia, a body composed of vast numbers of Jewish Communist personnel in various propaganda as well as other related agencies of the Comintern, from which recruits for the struggle against Zionism in Palestine were drawn.

All these organizational resources with their prolific activities were of a political nature. Their main purpose was to undermine Zionist political aims, demoralize its following, and inflict a mortal blow upon the flickering hopes of the revival of a Jewish national home in Palestine.

The struggle against Zionism, however, was not only an ideological or political issue but indeed was to become a security matter of a very high priority. Zionism was not just another outside national movement in an area dominated by a native and reactionary nationalist bourgeoisie. Rather it was a nationalist movement of a progressive social democratic nature, whose birthplace and hence ethnic and cultural roots lay in Russia proper. The majority of Russian Jews gave it strong emotional support, and between them were also strong family bonds. The whole future of Zionism depended upon this human reservoir of Russian Jewry, and particularly upon its numerous Zionist pioneering organizations.

It was this unusual blend of alien and rival political affiliations (social democracy) of Russian émigrés, building a base for the hopefully coming waves of Russian immigrants, that turned Zionism in general and the rise of Zionist settlement in Palestine in particular, with its worldwide connections with the Western powers and support into a serious security matter. As such, Zionism was dealt with by the appropriate security organs of the Soviet system…“ pp.67-68)

There, with crystal clarity, the entire basis of the opposition between Zionism and Communism is laid bare. Both movements were Jewish; both were Marxist in their essence. The difference was that the Zionists wanted their Jewish Communist paradise in Palestine rather than Russia. The Jewish Communists feared Zionism because it threatened to siphon off the Jewish Marxist masses of Russia to Palestine, thereby endangering Communist rule in Russia. The Zionists also had strong ties to the western capitalists who were sponsoring Zionism in Palestine through the British Empire and its Balfour Declaration. Therefore the Zionists, although brother Marxists, had to be suppressed. Between 1920 and 1924 about 4000-5000 Zionists were arrested and prosecuted by the Soviet authorities. In 1922 an arrangement was concluded between the Soviet agency Yevkom and the Joint Distribution Committee in America whereby the Yevkom and the JDC would collaborate in moving these Zionists to Palestine. The Yevkom would bring the deportees to the border and the Joint Distribution Committee would reroute them to Palestine. In the early days of the Soviet revolution in the 1920’s there was quite a traffic in Jews back and forth between Palestine and Bolshevik Russia. One famous example was the founder of Poale-Zion, Dov Ber Borochov, who returned to revolutionary Russia from Palestine to help organize the Red Brigades of Leon Trotsky. Another notable example was “Professor” Y. Meirson who expressed the hope in the 1920’s “that the Red Army (would) cross the Caucasus and the Taurus and (would) bring to them a Soviet Palestine.” Meirson later returned to Soviet Russia to become a professor of Yiddish literature. Israel Shohat was the founder of the famous Hashomer defense organization for Jews in Palestine. His wife Mania Shohat was a member of the Communist Workers Battalion and, during World War Two, worked for the League V, an organization devoted to raising military aid for the Soviet Union.

Readers interested in the intricate intertwining of Communism and Zionism in Palestine may consult Mr. Hen-Tov’s deeply researched study. It would be fair to say that the Jewish Communists resisted Zionism domestically while finding it useful for promoting revolution in Palestine because of its shared Marxist ideals. That is, of course, an oversimplification. The Communist Party line zigzagged constantly, particularly on such a touchy subject as Zionism. Nevertheless, that is as succinct a distillation of the subject as can be formulated. Zionism was never the identical twin of Communism but it was born of the same revolutionary mother in the womb of Zion.

Well, well. How will Mr. Pizza face respond to the latest posting?The quotation is 100% accurate. The quotation is from a reputable Israeli scholar who is not known to be a “self-hating” Jew. The information is consistent with what other Jewish scholars say. Hmmm.

I know.Let’s say that John Thames has psychological problems. Let’s claim that he suffers from pathological Jew hatred. Let’s dismiss the research volumes as “musty old books”. Let’s claim that he fantasizes about 12 year old girls. Let’s argue about when the income tax came in or the location of Arabian ports. But never, ever, try to deal with the issue at hand. Oh, no! That would lose the debate instantly.

If that doesn’t work, claim there is no debate. Deny the documented facts and accuse the adversary of having an “obsession”. All these tactics, and many more, are routinely used by two dick brains who would be laughed out of any real debate conducted by enforceable rules.

BROTHERLY QUARRELS

The old Soviet antagonism toward Zionism was something of a brotherly quarrel. The Communists were always sympathetic toward the Zionists in one sense because the Zionists were brother Marxists. Dov Berochov, Y.Meirson and many other Zionist pioneers were enthusiastic advocates of “scientific socialism” and communal living. The problem was that the Zionists wanted their Communist paradise in Palestine rather than Russia. This presented a problem for the Communists. To allow Zionism would create a dual loyalty problem, inducing hundreds of thousands of Communist Jews to be more loyal to Palestine to Moscow. Moreover, the mass emigration of Jews to a foreign land would destabilize a Communist regime in Russia heavily dominated by Jews. Thus, Zionism was harshly suppressed. Zionist periodicals were banned and the use of the Hebrew language was proscribed. Some Zionist activity was permitted until the late 1920’s provided that it aided, rather than conflicted with, Communist objectives. Thus, a traffic in Jews between Palestine and the Jewish Communist agricultural colonies in the Crimea on the north shore of the Black Sea was tolerated. Some Zionists convicted of crimes against the Soviet state were released from prison and allowed to go to Palestine with the assistance of the Joint Distribution Committee.

Zionism was always heresy in the Soviet system of values. But it was a special kind of heresy because it was the heresy of the Jewish Communist ruling class. Zionism was a ‘Progressive Social Democratic” movement – and was heresy because of geographical, not ideological reasons.

http://en.metapedia.org/wiki/List_of_communist_Jewshttp://en.metapedia.org/wiki/List_of_communist_Jews

A face is worthh a thosand words.

http://en.metapedia.org/wiki/List_of_communist_Jews

http://samsonblinded.org/blog/commis-are-jewish.htm

Here is an Israeli Jew who tells it exactly like I tell it – Jews were and are Communists – and most of the pioneers to the Zionist pre-state were Russian Communists. I win – again.

Now Ronnie and Fang – get down on your knees and blow each other – while chanting “Heil Thames!”

Pizza face, pizza face, wherefore art thou. o pizza face? Your revisionist Romeo misses you. Have you had too many facts shoved up your ass? Would a pound of flesh down at the reparations office suit you better?

Fret not, pizza face. More iconvenient facts await you.The unpleasant truth shall serenade you evermore, until you collapse into the bosom of eternal verity.

From
“A Gas Chambers Dream”
Rewritten by Puck

That pretty gay, and sad that your life revolves around me.

Maybe you should go off in search of your Trippetta, he hasn’t been around in a while either.

“Gay” means a light hearted, care free person, not a male cocksucker and ass fucker, which is what I suspect you are. I can be afford to be gay because I have money, you don’t. Not merely do I have money; I have overflowing knowledge with which to mock thee.

The Bard of Revisionism

Oh my goodness gracious!

Leonard Bernstein was a Jewish Red! He had all kinds of Communist front citations. He sponored a couple of concerts opposing the deportation of German-Jewish Communist spymaster Hans Eisler from the U.S.; he was a sponsor of a Soviet-American Music friendship society; he was a member of the Hollywood Communist Progressive Citizens of America and he supported the reelection of black Communist Congressman Benjamin Davis from Harlem.

Lennie would be the perfect choice to butt fuck Fang while singing “Maria”. Too bad he is serenading Puerto Ricans in the workers paradise in heaven . He should be bulldozing Palestinians down on earth.

Gaskammer doesn’t mean gas chamber.
Pedophile doesn’t mean sex with 12 year old children.
And I am gay for Fangbeer.

I miss him.

I miss Ronnie too. He is like Lennie Bernstein. “I feel Commie, I feel Commie, I feel pretty and Commie and gay…”

http://www.codoh.com/gcgv/gcvergas.html

Lessons in German terminology for adolescent punks.

http://www.codoh.com/gcgv/gcvergas.html

http://mycatbirdseat.com/2011/03/anthony-lawson-holocaust-hate-speech-were-the-germans-so-stupid/

30 minute video for dummies.

WEST SIDE STORY IS EAST SIDE PROPAGANDA

West Side Story is supposed to be a classic movie. And so it is, although for a reason much different than most people think. West Side Story is pure Communist propaganda. It is the Marxist lie that all races are equal and that there is no wrong in racial crossing. Most people have no idea that such doctrines are purely Communist in nature. But they are. Almost every major figure in the film’s production was both a Communist and a Jew. Let’s begin with the composer, Leonard Bernstein. Bernstein, starting in the late 1940’s, had major Communist front citations to his name. He sponsored two concerts for the defense of the Communist spy chief (and brother Jew) Gerhardt Eisler. Bernstein also sponsored the reelection of the black Communist Congressman from Harlem, Benjamin Davis. He enlisted in the Progressive Citizens of America, the Hollywood Communist front organization. And, just to extend his “brotherly love” activities into all spheres, he promoted American-Soviet friendship in music.

Was Red Lennie alone in his endeavors? Why, hardly. Jerome Robbins, the first director of the film, was an “ex” Jewish Communist. Robbins had carefully ratted on some (but not all) of his Jewish comrades in the film industry to placate Congress. Arthur Laurents, the playwright, traveled consistently in the red orbit. He was also a flaming homosexual, like Bernstein and Robbins. Thus, the screenwriter, the director and the composer were all Jewish Communists. West Side Story will never play in Israel where the Palestinian Arabs would die laughing. It was designed only to get white Americans to allow the Third World into America. In that, it surely succeeded. The problem is that no one is singing Maria anymore.

West Side Story will never play in Israel where the Palestinian Arabs would die laughing.

http://www.israel-opera.co.il/eng/?CategoryID=337&ArticleID=699

As usual, Ronnie dummie focuses on the ireelevancies while ignoring the point. Care to refute Bernstein’s Communist front citations ? Or do you prefer to leave that to pizza brain?

WHY MY NAME IS RONNIE DUMB SHIT

Why am I called “Ronnie Dumb Shit” folks? Well actually, it’s easy. I’m called that because I’m a bullshit artist. There is this guy John Thames, who has done all kinds of research that I’ve n ever heard of. He reads all these university texts I haven’t and he makes me look like the complete idiot I am. So I’ve come up with this technique. I don’t have to write even a paragraph, much less an essay. (Actually, I can’t do either because I never learned to write.)

Instead, I look for a sentence or two that I can show to be wrong. Usually, it has nothing to do with the subject. So if Thames proves that Jews from around the globe were congregating in Paris 1919 to pursue agendas like minorities treaties and a mandate over Palestine, I find an introductory sentence where he says the income tax came in permanently after WW1. Now, of course, this has nothing to do with whether the Jews were doing what Thames said they were doing at Paris. But it allows lying, stupid shit little me to argue about something that doesn’t matter. Actually, of course, the previous income taxes were temporary and frequently declared unconstitutional by the Supreme Court. So even on that one I’m wrong. But so what? The idea is to snipe at Thames because if I face him on the real facts I get bulldozed.

Now my side kick is named PIZZA FACE. He is just as dumb as I am but slightly more sophisticated.
If Thames writes that Jews were the founders and progenitors of modern socialism, PIZZA FACE, with his Google search instant knowledge, will go “Aha! Gotcha! The real founders of socialism were the Fouriests in France who weren’t Jewish.” True enough, but then he ignores that for the rest of the 19th century Jews in all countries were the leaders of socialist movements and that the leading commissars in the world’s first socialist empire, Soviet Russia, were overwhelmingly Jewish.

In short, PIZZA FACE confuses debating skills with real knowledge. These are the pathetic imbeciles with whom John Thames toys with every posting. Kicking fatso PIZZA FACE and adolescent jerk off RONNIE DUMB SHIT in the balls and stoping them into dust really does get a little boring. For a debate to be interesting requires worthy opponents. Since I cannot find opponents on my own level, I must beat up on these two morons instead.

RONNIE DUMB SHIT AND PIZZA FACE REFUTE THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPAEDIA

Hello there people. Now just to prove that John Thames is wrong I’m going to find an incorrect sentence in the Jewish Encyclopaedia and thereby prove that Jews had nothing to do with Communism Now just watch me show how sloppy those kikes are with facts and how Jews really had nothing to do with it. Just you watch!

http://www.white-history.com/hwr61i.htm

And remember, if you don’t believe me my friend PIZZA FACE will prove that Jews didn’t create Communism by proving that Charles Fourier was not a Jew.

RONNIE DUMB SHIT SAYS:

Now pay attention people. Don’t let that sneaky John Thames confuse you. Read those sentences that say that Communism was widespread in Jewish communities and that Communists deliberately concealed their real Jewish names so as not to give people like John Thames the wrong idea that Communism was really a Jewish movement. And be sure you eat your pizza while reading it, too.

WALTER DURANTY’S PULITZER PRIZE

Mr. Sulzberger of the New York Times has objected to returning Walter Duranty’s Pulitzer Prize on the grounds that this would be “Stalinist” rewriting of history. Mr. Sulzberger’s forebears did not object to Stalinist lying on the front page of their newspaper when Walter Duranty was lying through his teeth about the Ukrainian famine of 1932-1933. But now Mr. Sulzberger objects to “Stalinist” revocation of an undeserved prize in the interests of mere truth. The Talmudic dialectics are most amusing. The technical objection to the revocation of Duranty’s Pulitzer is, of course, that it was granted in 1931, two years before Duranty lied about the great famine. However, in a general sense, Walter Duranty was awarded the Pulitzer Prize for lying in the service of Jewish-Bolshevik Russia. Thus, his lying about the famine two years later was merely a continuation of his previous years of service to an alien cause.

Walter Duranty has gone down in history as the greatest of all liars. The reputation is really undeserved. Duranty lied prodigiously, of course, but he was hardly unique. He was merely the prototype of a huge legion of liars. Was Duranty really a bigger liar than, say, Sidney Webb and his wife Beatrice with their nonsensical, “Soviet Russia, a New Civilization?” Was he a bigger liar than the journalist Louis Fisher or did Duranty simply have a greater opportunity than the equally enthusiastic Fisher? Duranty’s denial of the great Ukrainian famine was not really a greater achievement than the praise of the entire American media for the film “Mission to Moscow” in which Jack and Harry Warner with the collaboration of ambassador Joseph Davies white washed Joseph Stalin and his purge trials, in particular. Again, was Duranty a bigger liar than the entire American media that attacked and destroyed the now confirmed Senator Joseph McCarthy?

Walter Duranty was a thoroughly despicable individual. But he did no differently than the Jews, who have lied for seven decades through one kangaroo trial after another about non-existent “gas chambers”. Duranty did not lie about non-existent “weapons of mass destruction”. He did not feign surprise on December 7, 1941 or concoct an Operation Northwood to provoke war with Cuba either. Does any of this justify Walter Duranty? Of course not. It merely makes him one of many agents of an alien power. And that is the point. Walter Duranty was a symbol of something far more sinister than his own prostitution. He was a symbol of Jewish power demanding obeisance from its gentile whores. Had Duranty not lied through his teeth, some other whore would have. Walter Duranty set an example that all journalists have followed since. He proved that fame and fortune await those who serve Jewish agendas. In Duranty’s day, that meant singing the praises of the Jewish commissars. Today, that means singing the praises of Zionist Israel.

Walter Duranty never knew Rick Sanchez or Helen Thomas. But he knew better than to cross the power that rewarded him. He rose to prominence on a foundation of lies. That foundation is as firm today as it ever was.

Ah gee, Ronnie and Pizza Face have given up. No more sophistries in their bag of tricks shall help them.

THE TIMIDITY OF THE IVORY TOWER

Academicians pose as fearless investigators of the truth. Strict objectivity is their credo. It sounds good. Unfortunately, it is bullshit. Academicians are basically servants of official truth. One need merely look at the 09/11 story to see what prostitutes they are. The fact that the physicist, Steven Jones, was forced from his tenured position at Brigham Young University merely reinforces their intellectual timidity. 09/11, of course, is merely the latest example of their gutlessness. As a general rule, academics are completely afraid of stepping outside the intellectual mainstream. They are deathly afraid of conspiracy theories and anything that varies from a strictly limited version of acceptable thought.

Not merely are academics whores, they are as resistant to truth when they are proven wrong as a virus is to many anti-biotics. Again and again, these ivory tower charlatans have resisted the truth for decades before grudgingly admitting that the people they derided as heretics may have been on to something. Just look at the English historian David Irving. Again and again Irving has aced and humiliated the academic historians with his superior research skills. He documented, long before the academic historians were willing to admit it, that Winston Churchill was a drunk, a military incompetent, a man in the pay of Jewish interests, a man who prolonged a war that Hitler was willing to stop and a man who destroyed the British Empire. Irving’s reward for his efforts was to be financially destroyed by a rigged verdict in a kangaroo court. It was Irving who discovered a documented record of a phone conversation in which he told one of his subordinates, Hans Lammerer, how Hitler wanted the “Jewish Question” solved until the end of the war. Irving also candidly admits that the forensic tests of the so called “gas chambers” do not support the Holocaust myth.

David Irving would never get tenure at a major university because he would be a daily rebuke to the incompetence of his fellows. Academics during the First World War swallowed wholesale the fiction that there was a vast German conspiracy to conquer the world. They willingly enlisted as intellectual prostitutes in George Creel’s Committee of Public Information. They encouraged citizens to spy on each other and violated every civil liberty in the book. When the revisionist historians proved in the mid-1920’s that German “sole guilt” for the war was a fiction, the Anglophile historians swallowed in astonishment. They could not disprove the revisionists but they refused to believe. They were no different than the Van Pelts and Richard Evans of the present who just cannot, and will not believe, that the Holocaust Deniers are right. These academics have claimed for decades that Franklin Roosevelt was “surprised” at Pearl Harbor. The surprise is really on them although they have still not figured it out. On and on it goes.

Academics are the voodoo doctors of political theology. They are penguins in tuxedos who puff their chests and flap their wings at any who point out what they conceal. Like the prostitute, they suck, serve and swallow, and raise their eyes in adoration to the sex organ of propaganda they ardently fellate in the service of truth.

Why, the bullshit boys have grown silent again.

Are they runing up the white flag? Or are they just pulverized by overwhelming factual knowledge and incomparable analytical ability?

FAMILY SQUABBLES

Anyone who reads the history of Communism and Zionism discovers very quickly that the two rival movements were in competition for the solution of the “Jewish question”. Again and again, the Communists would attempt to demonstrate that “scientific socialism” was a better alternative for Jews than Zionism. Just a few quotations from the Comintern (the Communist Third International) should suffice to demonstrate the point.

“The miserable results of the Zionist efforts and their complete fiasco can be seen particularly clearly when one compares them with the great speed with which the Jewish working masses in the Soviet Union are taking up agriculture.”

“While Zionism formerly was able to record only trifling successes in regard to settlements, this sphere of work is now entirely closed to it. To this is to be added the fact that another country, the country of the proletarian dictatorship has shown how the national question can be really solved, and with it also the Jewish question.

With scarcely a fraction of the huge sums which Zionism has squandered, the Soviet Union has achieved in a few years, on a sound socialist basis, far more than Zionism has accomplished on an unsound basis, in the course of decades in regard to the settlement of Jews.”

“If we add that the agrarisation activity of the Soviet Government in Russia has done much more in two years for the solution of the Jewish question on that territory than Zionism has effected in fifty years, and that the healthy development of the Jewish colonies in the Soviet Union affords such an attraction for many of the disappointed Jewish emigrants to Palestine, that they are anxious to return to the Soviet Union by the hundreds, it may serve as an indication as to where the Jewish masses, who have hitherto been dazzled by Zionism, must turn to find escape from national and social oppression.”

As these quotations clearly indicate, the Communists and the Zionists were both wooing the “Jewish vote”. The wooing ultimately culminated in Joseph Stalin’s “Palestine in Siberia” called Birobidzhan. But at this point in history, the early to mid-1920’s, the Communist international was seducing the Zionists with the lure of the Jewish Communist agricultural colonies in the Crimea. These colonies had been established by the KOMZERT and the OMZERT, the Communist agencies for the resettlement of the Jews on the land. The Communists and the Zionists both pursued a policy of “normalizing” the Jews by weaning them away from commerce and trade and converting them into toilers of the land. Thus, the conflict between the Communists and the Zionists was based on shared proletarian ideals but divergence over which location was to be preferred, Russia or Palestine.

At the time it looked like the Communists had a pretty good argument. Zionism was, indeed, involved in some heavy slogging in Palestine. Immigration to Palestine was encountering heavy resistance from the Arabs, as the riots of 1920, 1921 and later 1929 indicated. Immigration was slow in the 1920’s and prospects for an eventual Jewish state did not look good. Thus, quite a few disillusioned Zionists did return to Russia in the 1920’s, reinforcing the view of the British Mandatory authorities that the Communist and Zionist movements were intertwined. In the end Zionism succeeded and Communism failed. But for a long time it looked as though the odds favored the Jewish Communists. Such were the political struggles of the Communists versus the Zionists. Those struggles are still very interesting to read as they reveal connections many would like to forget.

INGLORIOUS PAPACY

Pope Ratzinger has written a book defending the Jews from the charge of murdering Jesus. His argument is that “Judeans” does not mean all the Jews. Just who does it mean, then? Are we to believe that it was the non-Jewish elements of the Judean population who wanted Jesus crucified? Who did Jesus offend, the Jewish Sanhedrin or the Galilean peasant population? Who demanded his death when they rejected Barrabas and chose Jesus to condemn? Was it the Gauls who invaded Turkey south to Palestine in 275 B.C. who demanded that? Or was it the Jewish mob?

Pope Rat Poison has a very interesting theological mind. One suspects that his theology comes from a crematory oven burning anti-Jewish Christian heresies. Either that, or he intends for his rewrite of the New Testament to be produced in Hollywood as “Inglorious Papacy”.

Pizza face, o pizza face, where art thou? Cans’t thou at least accuse me of misquoting Jewish reference works? Has “The Jew of the Debate Boards” taken refuge in Malta? Christopher Marlowe would be ashamed of you.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eduard_Bloch

Hitler’s “good Jew”, Dr. Edouard Bloch, who treated his mother, Klara, for cancer. Note Bloch’s comments on the good behavior of the allegedly insane Adolf as a youth.

CORPORATE AMERICA

Corporate America once created the highest standard of living ever seen to American workers. It invested its money in building American industry and raised wages accordingly. It created a land of superabundance and unlimited opportunity. But that corporate America is gone. The new corporate America invests its money overseas and destroys the standard of living of white Americans. It has no loyalty to any country and thinks only of its own profits. In the process it devastates national economies and once productive citizens.

This corporate America is an abomination. It has abandoned the old system of family wage. It no longer pays a man enough to support a wife and family. It pays two people less than it used to pay one. This corporate America must be destroyed. It must be replaced by a national economy where American prosperity and American jobs are the paramount consideration. Shipping any American production facility or American job overseas for any reason must be codified as treason to America and punished accordingly. If American workers cannot be found to fill jobs they must be trained. No hiring of foreign workers on HB-1 visas shall be tolerated.

If corporate America does not like this, that is too bad. Andrew Carnegie, Henry Ford and Henry Dow were ruthless businessmen but they hired American workers and made their money in America. J.P. Morgan was a Wall Street financier but he did not work for Goldman Sachs. Henry Ford not merely made the Model-T, he wrote “The International Jew” and published the Dearborn Independent. If corporate America puts the “corporate” before the “American”, they should be dealt with exactly as Jews who put Israel before America. No other standard shall do.

REVOLUTIONARY PRINCIPLES

Americans still imagine that they can work within the system to save themselves. They have not yet caught on to the fact that their government and their economy are run by anti-white traitors dedicated to their destruction. America cannot be saved by voting Democratic or Republican. Both parties are anti-white. Nor can America be saved by establishing a third party. Such a party, even if it could obtain power, a most unlikely possibility, would be nullified by the courts and the power of the media.

No, it is much too late in the day for such efforts. Ron Paul and his followers mean well but they are whistling in the wind. White America can only be saved through revolution. Revolution does not mean writing essays or engaging in debate. It does not mean getting on the radio or arguing with media commentators. It means violence and killing. Who shall the revolution target? It shall target the racial aliens – and those who let them in. The racial aliens are the Mexicans, the Hispanics generally and the Asians. Who let them in? Primarily the Jews who regard white racial homogeneity as a threat to their own dominance and corporate interests who wish to lower their labor costs. The politicians who do the bidding of the Jews and the corporations must also be targeted.

The revolution is not interested in taking prisoners. It is interested only in securing America for whites only. Those who have betrayed white America deserve no mercy. They shall receive none.

THE COMINTERN ON PALESTINE

The Communist Third International always opposed Zionism in Palestine on the grounds that the Zionists were plotting to dispossess the legitimate Arab inhabitants of the land. For once, the Communists were telling the truth. That was indeed the intent of the Zionists, since fulfilled. However, the Communists never succeeded in convincing the Arabs that Communism was a good thing. The Arabs remained convinced that Zionism was ideologically closely related to Communism, which indeed it was. Mr. Jacob Ten-Hov has this to say on the subject in “Communism and Zionism in Palestine” on p.96.

“…The Arabs looked with disfavor upon the Zionist immigrants who came to Palestine for they were people ‘whose ideas and habits (were) influenced by the social and Bolshevik principles which they (brought) with them…a strong Bolshevik element has already established itself in the country and has produced an effect on the population…’ Jamal Husseini, Secretary of the Arab Higher Committee, in testimony before the Royal Commission in 1937, confirmed these fears in the following words: As to the communistic ideas and principles of the Jewish immigrants – most repugnant to the religious customs and ethical principles of this country.”

The fears of the Arabs were solidly grounded in the facts. The Comintern and Communist propaganda generally in this period simultaneously denounced Zionism while trying to woo the Zionist settlers to return to the Jewish Communist Soviet Union. As Hen-Tov writes:

“On frequent occasions, the Comintern called upon the Jewish masses to abandon the ‘Zionist hell’ and to migrate back to their respective countries of origin. It has already been mentioned that in 1925, the Soviet Government inaugurated the A.G.R.O. organization to promote the migration of Jewish workers from abroad into the Jewish agricultural settlements in the Soviet Union. A strong attempt was also made, though without much success, to attract Zionist workers from Palestine. Somewhat later on, a leitmotif in the Comintern’s literature can readily be detected, that of the counsel that ‘the best thing the Jewish workers could do would be to quit Palestine altogether.’”

The attempts of the Party to oppose Zionism while encouraging Jewish loyalty to Communism led to many difficult situations. When the Party opposed the Zionists over the Wailing Wall riots of 1929, large numbers of Jews quit the Party in disgust over its anti-Zionist position. This mass resignation took place at precisely the same time that Joseph Stalin was sponsoring his Birobidzhan project, “Palestine in Siberia”, to woo Jewish loyalties back to Communism. The loss of Jewish comrades was so severe that when the 1936-1939 Arab uprising against British rule and Zionism in Palestine erupted, the Party took an entirely different line. Then the Party placated its Jewish members by arguing that both the Arab and Jewish workers should unite against the real enemy, the capitalist British.

As the creation of the Jewish state approached in 1948, the Party began to proclaim that Jews could be equally loyal to either the Jewish Autonomous Region called Birobidzhan or to the impending state of Israel. A period of rapprochement between Zionism and Communism existed in 1947 and 1948. The Soviet ambassador to the U.N., Andrei Gromyko, advocated partition of Palestine into Arab and Jewish states. The Party adopted a pro-Zionist position and condemned the “mistakes and errors of the past” (i.e., the anti-Zionism of 1929). Zionism was now compatible with Soviet objectives. The Soviet Union formally recognized Israeli statehood just after the United States did. Many thousands of Communist Jews poured down through the Balkans with Stalin’s permission to invade Arab Palestine. Jacob Berman in Poland and Ana Pauker in Romania enthusiastically aided in this process. The Zionists got the weapons they needed to win the war against the Arabs from the Communists in Czechoslovakia. The Czechs trained Jewish pilots at Zatec airfield and provided them with captured German Messerschmidts.

The romance of Stalin with ideologically deviationist Zionists did not last long. The Party soon returned to its traditional anti-Zionist position, especially after Israel aligned itself with the west in 1953. Nevertheless, a great many of the Zionist immigrants to Palestine have retained their essentially Marxist outlook to this day. Portraits of Lenin and Trotsky adorn the walls of their collective farms. These well established facts of the past have generally gone down the memory hole by common consent. The Jews, who have always been at great pains to deny the Jewish background of Communism, naturally do not want it recalled. The conservatives, the darlings of the right wing revisionist Zionists, do not want to talk about it either. Israel is supposedly the ally of the United States and such disreputable facts do not look good on the resume.

Come on, pussy boys. Get your dicks out of each others mouths and fight back. You can do it. Fang will have to take off his apron and do some research, instead of making spaghetti for his corporate girlfriend.

SINGING DIXIE

There is an unfortunate tendency in the American right wing to glorify the old South. This view is based on a purely romantic and uninformed view of the plantation “civilization”. The South before the war was totally anachronistic. Its economy was agricultural, based on slave labor and completely unsuited to an emerging industrial nation. Had it been allowed to survive, the unification of the United States as the greatest industrial power of the mid-nineteenth to mid-twentieth century would have been impossible. Before the war, there was great controversy over so-called “free” versus slave states. It was a question of primary political importance for the dominance of either the north or south. The United States could not have survived half free and half slave. The South had to go for the future development of the nation.

It is idle to argue over whether the destruction of slavery and southern political independence could have been achieved without the war. The fact is that the attempted compromises failed and the issue came down to force, as it usually does. Southerners singing Dixie always live in a fantasy world of states rights and strict constitutionality where the ugly realities of big power politics are never allowed to interfere with the reveries. Let’s examine what these Southerners ignore. If the South had succeeded in breaking up the United States into two nations, then the only half formed U.S. would have been at the mercy of the European powers and their balance-of-politics ploys. The French were in Mexico at this time under Maximillian. A divided U.S would have allowed the French to block U.S. expansion westward across the Mississippi. They could have formed an alliance with either the North or the Confederacy to block either of the two U.S. powers from moving into lands coveted by the French. The British Empire, world famous for playing one rival off against another, could have done the same, provoking either the North or the South and then picking up the pieces. (And, indeed, during the Civil War itself the British considered intervening to aid the South militarily.) No one knows how these imperial scenarios would have played out but a divided U.S. would have been very susceptible to such schemes.

Confederates with misty eyes simply assume that the Confederacy, once established, would have avoided all these snares. Presumably the great General Lee and the glorious Army of Northern Virginia would have solved all problems, as they did at Appamatox. The lack of reality in this kind of thinking is amazing. The old problem of “free” versus slave states would also have reemerged after a southern victory. If the United States had been allowed to expand westward despite the intervention of the British and French, then every new state or territory would have been up for grabs, exactly as before the war. The old struggle would have reemerged, threatening to revive the war once more. In short, the Confederate Southerners are kidding themselves.

There is no doubt whatever that the great War Between the States greatly accelerated government power and led to other undesirable results, as great wars always do. But the fact of the matter is that the North was right. A Confederate victory would have had disastrous results for the future of America. It is idle to object that the South was only seceding as their forefathers seceded from England. There is no logical consistency in politics. The Confederacy had to go. Secession is not the solution to present day American problems either. The solution to darkening America is not to retreat from the racial invasion by “seceding”. The solution is to fight for every inch of the land to preserve the Union. And if it takes William Tecumseh Sherman to burn Mexico city to the ground and scorch the earth of La Raza, so much the better.

OLIVER SCHMUCKWELL

Oliver Schmuckwell was one of the greatest of Englishmen. His fame rests on his capacity for exterminating Irishmen. Schmuckwell, like many of the great mass murderers of history, was a God fearing man. He learned the piety of violence from the Jewish Old Testament. There he read how the Hebrews of old slaughtered the Caanites without distinction of age or sex. They slew in the name of the Lord – and Schmuckwell did the same. Oliver Schmuckwell never doubted his divine right to kill anyone who opposed the British Empire. Irishmen were exactly like Palestinian Arabs – impediments to the right to rule. Oliver Schmuckwell thought so highly of the Jews that he once proposed to replace English with Hebrew as the official language of the English people. It is too bad that Schmuckwell lived before America-Israel-Public-Affairs Committee. Had he merely lived in Arthur Balfour’s time, no doubt he would have proposed a Jewish “national home” in Ulster to Mannaseh-ben-Israel.

Oliver Schmuckwell was the Lazar Kaganovich of Irish famine. He thought nothing of stealing estates and leaving the former owners to starve on the rocks. His version of Deir Yassein was bayoneting Irish babies at Drogheda. Oliver Schmuckwell was the “scientific capitalist” liquidator of the Irish bourgeoisie. He brought “democracy” to Ireland via absentee land lord crop exporting – just like Jews exporting shekels to Israel while Gaza starves.

FEMINISM AND THE FALL OF ROME

Feminism is not a new thing. Neither is it a sign of progress, as some imagine. It has flourished in the past with results as disastrous as presently. Many parallels exist between the feminist movement in the Roman Empire and the feminist movement of today. In the early days of the Republic, Rome was extremely patriarchal. The father, the paterfamilias, held the power of life and death over his wife and children. This system lasted until roughly the end of the Second Punic war against Carthage. Then began a vast movement for the “liberation” of women. The war had, in a sense, been won by women. The Romans had lost the entirety of their manpower in three consecutive defeats at the hands of Hannibal Barcas. The final disaster came at Cannae where 60,000 Romans were surrounded and stabbed in the back.

When women had grown back the dead soldiers and the final defeat of Hannibal was achieved at Zama, Roman women demanded freedom. One of the first concessions granted to them was the repeal of the law against luxury. The repeal of this law allowed Roman women to flaunt their wealth in public. No longer did they have to practice frugality as matron of the household. Next they acquired the right to participate as gladiators in the Forum, the right to enter minor political office and the right to practice infanticide and abortion. The Roman birth rate plummeted and vice and corruption spread among Roman men. A general strike against marriage ensued and the Emperor Augustus tried to revive reproduction with a bachelor tax. It was all to no avail. The situation became so outrageous that a famous Roman remarked that “We Romans, who rule the world, are ruled by our women.” The poet Juvenal remarked that the Roman aristocracy “divorced to marry and married to divorce”.

At the same time that this female liberation was taking place the Empire was overrun by swarms of slaves and racial aliens. Like many European cities today, it became difficult to find a genuinely Roman face in Rome. Diversity, like feminism, greatly contributed to the fall of the Empire. By Empire’s end, the legions which had conquered the world were half Roman and half barbarian (rather like the American army today, where increasing numbers of Third Worlders proliferate). When Rome fell, the female irresponsibility which had so greatly contributed to the Empire’s downfall made a severe impression on the fathers of the Christian Church. They made a point to yoke females and to impose the virtue of chastity. Given what they had witnessed during the fall of Rome the misogynist viewpoint of the early Christian elders can hardly be criticized.

The parallels of all this to modern day America can hardly be disputed. Although America is not Rome the same trends, particularly that of the female unleashed, are evident. Women, throughout history, are either the bedrock of a social structure or the dissolvers of the social structure. In early America, as in early Rome, women were baby makers and home makers. In latter day America, as in latter day Rome, women are imitation men and unborn baby killers. The consequences are the same, then as now.

IN DEFENSE OF HONEST ABE

Southern propagandists have presented a generally unfavorable picture of Abraham Lincoln. He has been accused of having provoked the war, of interfering with a divine right of secession and of being a hypocrite on the subject of slavery. All of this is demonstrably untrue. Lincoln’s position on slavery was consistently misrepresented by the press. Lincoln never had the slightest intent of abolishing slavery in the slave states; he only insisted that slavery not be permitted to spread westward. When the northern states passed “free men” laws to prevent the repatriation of escaped slaves, Lincoln sought to repeal such laws so that the slaves could be returned to their rightful owners.

Lincoln was an unabashed white supremacist. Again and again in his Illinois political debates with Stephen Douglas, Lincoln denounced any suggestion that the inferior black race should be placed on an equal footing with the superior white race. He dreaded the thought of racial crossing and feared miscegenation as a threat to the survival of the white race. Lincoln’s statements to this effect are so numerous and well documented, both before, during and after the war, that it is a tribute to historical white wash that his real views have been erased from public consciousness. Early in the war in 1862 Lincoln invited a delegation of black leaders to the White House to listen to his proposals for deporting blacks to the Caribbean or Africa. Honest Abe considered numerous plans along these lines, including a plan to send blacks to the Chiriqui region in Central America, a failed attempt to send them to islands off Haiti and encouraging immigration to Liberia on the west coast of Africa.

Lincoln has received much criticism from Southerners over his Emancipation Proclamation. They denounce it as purely hypocritical, freeing the slaves who were under Southern control but not freeing the slaves who were under Northern control. But this objection misses the point. The Emancipation Proclamation was designed to disrupt the Southern war effort by undermining the loyalties of the blacks who were manning the Confederate arms and munitions industries. In that, it succeeded admirably.

Lincoln continued with his plans for black deportation after the war. He unsuccessfully solicited the British Empire to allow black migration to Guinea and other South American colonies. Lincoln was literally obsessed with solving America’s “Negro problem” and gave it his highest priority until his death by assassination. There were major impediments to Lincoln’s scheme aside from the reluctance of foreign countries to accept black deportees. The radical Republicans wanted to use black voters to intimidate and control the defeated white Southerners. Business leaders of the emerging industrial economy wanted cheap black labor. Lincoln faced a daunting and difficult task. But he was determined that the task should be accomplished – for the future good of white America.

Many legitimate criticisms of Lincoln can be made. He was a wartime dictator, he did suppress civil liberties and the freedom of the press, he did allow Northern armies to commit large scale atrocities. But all this pales beside one fact – Abraham Lincoln was preoccupied with one overriding concern – ridding the white United States of its black plague. Even more than preserving the Union, Lincoln wanted a future America of racially homogeneous whites. Let us consider the problems which would have been avoided had he succeeded. Had blacks been expelled from America, then the hordes of Communist Jews who poured into the United States in the 1880’s would not have been able to use the “Negro problem” to promote their aims. There would not have been a gigantic “Civil Rights” campaign to uplift the Negro from presumed white oppression. There would never have been created a vast government bureaucracy to deal with this so-called problem and no federal interference with state and private property rights Neither would other groups, such as Hispanics and feminists, have been able to jump on the Civil Rights bandwagon. In short, America would be a free white nation. Abe Lincoln was a merciless man in wartime. But there was no reason to suppose that he would have been any less merciful in time of peace. It was Thaddeus Stevens and the radical Republicans who imposed Reconstruction, not Lincoln.

Abraham Lincoln was no saint. But he was a white supremacist, a preserver of the Union and the man who worked harder than any other to solve America’s racial disease. He deserves to be remembered and honored, although for reasons much different from those the Zionist media suggest.

ADOLF HITLER IN VIENNA

When Adolf Hitler was living in the Ratzner’s men’s hotel in Vienna he became very good friends with several of the Jewish residents there, particularly Joseph Neumann and Siegfried Lofner. The young Adolf not merely had many political conversations with these Jews, he personally profited from the associations. One of them was a coppersmith and Hitler used him to market his paintings. Hitler also spent many hours in conversation with Neumann, discussing such things as Herzl’s Zionism. On one occasion, Hitler objected to Kaiser Wilhelm’s removal of a statue that had been erected to the German-Jewish poet, Heinrich Heine. Although Hitler stressed that he did not share Heine’s politics, he thought it wrong not to honor the poetic achievements of a great German.

None of this jibes with the later fiction that Hitler was reflexively anti-Jewish. It is, of course, true that Hitler was a great admirer of Karl Lueger, the anti-Semitic mayor of Vienna. As in the case of Lueger, Lueger’s anti-Semitic bark was worse than his bite. The future Fuehrer also liked to attend performances of Shakespeare’s “A Midsummer Night’s Dream” by Max Reinhardt of whom Hitler was a great admirer. Hitler later marketed the vast majority of his paintings through the Viennese Jewish art dealer, Morgenthau, who sold Hitler’s paintings and sketches to mainly Jewish clients (as revealed by Morgenthau’s card index). Adolf Hitler thought very highly of his family’s Jewish physician, Edouard Bloch, who treated, unsuccessfully, Hitler’s mother, Klara, for breast cancer. In fact, Hitler went on to say that Dr. Bloch was a “good Jew” and that if all Jews were like Dr. Bloch, there would be no “Jewish problem”. Bloch was given special protection by the Gestapo when the Anschluss took place in 1938 before he emigrated to New York, dying in 1945. Bloch’s comments on the young Hitler who accompanied his mother to Bloch’s office are interesting. Doctor Bloch stated that the young Hitler was extremely well behaved, polite and showed no signs of mental disturbance whatever. Moreover, when Hitler’s mother died, Bloch never saw a more distraught individual. While not condoning Hitler’s later policies, Edouard Bloch had nothing but positive memories of Adolf Hitler as a youth.

If Hitler was not originally anti-Semitic, what happened to change his attitudes? As the historians Brigitte Haman and David Irving have demonstrated, Hitler’s attitude change was a direct response to the Jewish involvement in Communism and the post-war betrayal of Germany. The strikes at war’s end which crippled Germany were largely Jewish inspired, as even anti-Hitler writers acknowledge. Communism in the year 1919 in Germany was everywhere Jewish. The three Bavarian Communist upheavals were led by men like Kurt Eisner, Hugo Haas, Ernest Toller, Eugen Levine-Nissen and the revolutionary Jewess, Rosa Luxemberg. Other prominent Communist Jews of the day were Leo Jogisches, Paul Levi, Klara Zetkin and Ruth Fischer. The Brest-Litovsk treaty which ended Germany’s war with Russia was signed, on behalf of Bolshevik Russia, by Trotsky-Bronstein, Joffe and Abramovich. In nearby Hungary, the six month reign of Communist terror, March through August, was run by the Jew Bela Kun. 160 out of 200 of his top commissars were Jewish, including the notorious hangman, Tibor Tzamuelly.

This is what changed Adolf Hitler’s attitudes toward Jews. Hitler’s identification of Jews with Communism was not unique. Virtually everyone of his time made the same identification. The authoress, Cecille Tormay, who wrote the famous autobiographical account of the Hungarian revolution, “An Outlaw’s Diary”, said the same. So did Winston Churchill, in his famous newspaper article, “Zionism versus Bolshevism: A Struggle for the Soul of the Jewish People”. The American State Department overflowed with reports in the early 1920’s on Jewish involvement in Communism. Despite Hitler’s undoubtedly correct view on the Jewish involvement in Communism, he continued to make distinctions between good Jews and bad Jews. When Hitler discovered that his chauffeur, Emil Maurice, may have been a Jew, he personally ordered Maurice converted into an “honorary Aryan”. The early National Socialist regulations made exceptions for Jews who had loyally fought for Germany in the First World War. When the Nuremberg race laws were passed in 1935, Hitler had a major problem because of the huge number of part Jews in the Wehrmacht. He converted over 50,000 of them into “honorary Aryans” to avoid their expulsion from the military. An excellent source on this is “Hitler’s Jewish Soldiers” by Bryan Rigg.

Hitler undoubtedly acted to purge Germany of Jewish influence. His closing down of Jewish businesses and banning of Jews from the professions is proof of this. Yet he continued to be remarkably lenient in many cases. Hitler personally sponsored the career of the part-Jewish soprano, Marguerite Slezak, at the Berlin State Opera. He also managed to overlook the marriages of a great many German artists to Jewish spouses. A classic case in point was the operetta composer, Franz Lehar, who married Lizzy Leon, the daughter of the Viennese Jewish librettist, Victor Leon. A not inconsiderable number of Nazi officials were also of part Jewish ancestry. Reinhard Heydrich, the head of the Czech protectorate, was actually or allegedly the son of a Jewish actor. In the military, part Jews like Lutwaffe General Helmut Wilberg, General Johannes Zukertort, Admiral Bernhard Rogge, Commander Paul Ascher of the battleship Bismarck and the famous General Manstein (Lowenstein) are choice examples of part Jews serving Germany’s National Socialist regime.

Adolf Hitler was not above making deals with those who later denounced him as the source of all evil. One of his first acts as Chancellor of Germany was to conclude the Havaara or Transfer Agreement with the Zionists. By the terms of this agreement approximately 40,000 of Germany’s Jews were sent to Palestine minus an exit tax. This facilitated the Zionist objective of ridding Germany of unwanted Jews while facilitating the Zionist objective of moving Jews to Palestine. Zionist leaders praised Hitler as the man who would preserve the “racial purity of both the Germans and the Jews. It was two Zionist rabbis, Leo Baeck and Joachim Prinz, who helped Hitler formulate his definition of a Jew in the Nuremberg laws. The Nazis founded special Zionist training camps for agricultural pursuits for Jews who wished to go to Palestine. The Nazi press consistently praised the achievements of the Zionists in Palestine and not so subtly suggested that German Jews should emigrate there. The Nazis prepared a special medallion commemorating Zionism and allowed the blue and white flag of Zionism to fly alongside the swastika. It was the only flag beside the swastika to legally fly in the Third Reich.

Today, all these verifiable facts about Adolf Hitler’s intimate relations with Jewry have gone down the historical memory hole. No one wishes to remember that it was the Central Emigration Office of the SS under Adolf Eichmann who loaded Jews onto the boats on the Danube as they sailed to British Mandatory Palestine. Nor does anyone wish to remember Werner Goldberg, the ideal Nazi soldier, who was the half Jewish son of a convert to Lutheranism. Even more forgetful was the little Jewish girl and her mother who used to visit Hitler at Berschtesgaden until 1938. And as for Hedy Lamar’s claim that she had a sexual tryst with Der Fuehrer at the insistence of her half Jewish husband and Nazi arms dealer, Fritz Mandel, the less said the better.

Adolf Hitler, for better or worse, was a thinking man’s anti-Semite. He opposed Jewish influence while acknowledging the good in individual Jews. Since these facts do not comport with the legend that he killed six million Jews in purported “gas chambers”, the facts have generally been buried. To read the suppressed facts is to realize, once again, that history is “a lie agreed upon”.

Where is that dick head Ronnie? Probably giving Pizza Face a Pasta Job.

THE TALMUD RE-EXAMINED

The internet is now overflowing with Jews and rabbis trying to explain away the “misunderstood” and “misquoted” Talmud. As always throughout history the explanations are that the odious passages are mistranslated or taken out of context, among other camouflages and deceptions. Many of these tactics may be seen on You Tube.

Before proceeding with an analysis of these explanations, it would be useful to explain what the Talmud really is. The Talmud is a series of debates on how all the rules and regulations which cover Jewish life are to be interpreted and implemented. The Talmud covers everything from marriage and divorce, to bathing and hand washing rituals, to medicine and healing, to relations with non-Jews, to religious duties, to you name it. These issues frequently revolve around Biblical passages and their interpretation and misinterpretation. The disputations on all these subjects are conducted by various rabbis taking opposing points of view, rather like lawyers arguing their briefs before an appellate court. And this technique provides an excellent cover device for various odious passages in the Talmud. When the offending passage is cited, the Jews can argue that it is only the irate comment of one particular contributor to the Talmud, not the essence of the work as a whole.

The charges against the Talmud throughout the centuries have been that it is severely anti-gentile, that it teaches that non-Jews are animals in human form, that it is permitted for Jews to swindle and cheat non-Jews, that it condones various bizarre sexual practices, including sex with underage children, that it turns the truth upside down through sophistries, that it inverts logic and regulates behavior through absurd regulations, etc. Let us examine in detail how the Jews have responded to these charges from past to present. There is a famous passage in the Talmud where rabbi Simon ben Yohai proclaims: “The best of the gentiles must be killed!” The Jews respond to this passage by arguing that the rabbi was perturbed by witnessing the death of his son at the hands of the Roman emperor, Hadrian. Thus, the rabbis words are a response to personal tragedy, not a formula to be applied to non-Jews generally. But if this were the case, there would be no need to preserve the words for posterity. Moreover, there are many similar passages in the Talmud that cannot be so explained. Frequently these passages involve words for ancient, deceased peoples such as Hittites, Akum, etc. The Jews argue that these are animosities of the past, not the present. In reality, they are code words for gentiles generally. Laws, to have any meaning, must be for the present. To include epithets for ancient peoples in a set of books designed for present day Jews would serve no purpose. Therefore, the references to ancient peoples serve merely as code words for present day gentiles.

The Jews have a long and provable record of deception about their Talmudic scriptures. When the King of France in the 14th century asked the chief rabbi about a passage in the Talmud that referred to Jesus being “boiled in hell for eternity in hot excrement”, the rabbi responded that it was “another Jesus, not Jesus” of Nazareth. The rabbis explanation was rejected by the King, for obvious reasons. Clearly, the Jesus in question was thoroughly hated by the Jews. What Jesus could it have been, if not the Nazarene who tried to convert God’s Chosen to anew faith? When confronted by the famous Talmudic passage about virginity coming back to a three year old girl like a tear coming back to the eye, the Jews explain that this passage is not condoning sex with three year olds as some might imagine, rather the passage merely reflects on what to do if unfortunate abuse occurs. But another Talmudic passage says that: “A maiden aged three years and a day may be acquired in marriage by coition.” If the intent were to prevent child abuse, then why allow marriage to take place at such an early age? Would allowing conjugal rights to sexual intercourse at ages for five and six solve the abuse or permit it to continue?

When the Reformation erupted in the sixteenth century the Jews, believing that the crumbling of the Catholic Church presaged the coming of the Messiah, started publishing unexpurgated editions of the Talmud with the odious passages intact. When this proved premature, the Jews deleted the offending passages, instructing that these harsh anti-gentile dictums were to be transmitted orally only to future generations. If the Talmud is really the innocent, unoffending book the Jews claim it is, there would be no need for such deletions and deceptions.

Many additional examples of odious Talmudic passages could be cited. There are famous passages about gentile women preferring sex with farm animals to sex with their own men folk, to testing women for menstruation by sitting them on wine casks, to resisting help for a drowning gentile, on and on it goes. Whenever confronted with these passages Jews shall invariably argue that such examples are to be narrowly construed in specific circumstances, they are not general rules to be applied to all situations or they will quote a contrary opinion of some rabbi in another section of the Talmud. The great anti-Semite Theodore Fritsch, writing under an assumed name in “The Secret of the Jews Success” stated that the Talmud is like a trap door. It offers so many opinions of a mutually exclusive character that the critic who attempts to prove anything by quoting the Talmud shall be immediately confronted by a passage proclaiming the contrary. This again, is a well established technique of deception, used by liars of all varieties and descriptions, and not just Jews studying the Talmud.

It is well to establish just what function the Talmud plays in relation to the Bible. The Talmud is to the Bible what the Supreme Court is to the Constitution. The Talmud, the oral law of the rabbis consisting of the Mischna and Gemara, is the interpretation of what the Bible “really” means, just as the rulings of the Supreme Court determine what the Constitution “really” means. The Talmud is the ultimate law of the Jews. It is constantly evolving as the “oral law” is whatever the rabbis say it is. The Talmud is an enormously complex volume of work comprising, as it does, over twenty six volumes and tractates. This fact has caused considerable problems for gentile critics of the Talmud in various trials throughout Europe. Typically, the gentile critic of the Talmud, although he may be able to read Hebrew, has not taken the life time of study it would take to master the Talmud as a whole. He only studies the odious anti-gentile passages, of which there are many. Thus, when the critic is cross-examined on the stand by the Jewish defense attorney, he can be shown to be ignorant of many things in the Talmud, and thus his case collapses. This happened to the Greek Orthodox priest, Father Pranaitas at the Belis ritual murder trial in Russia in 1911. It also happened to the Catholic pamphleteer, August Rohling, in the 1860’s. Such tactics do not, of course, rebut the offending passages but the effect on a jury is very striking.

In reviewing the charges against the Talmud and the defenses of it over the centuries, a remarkable consistency may be noted. The passages read the same; the explanations read the same. Nothing ever changes. This remarkable consistency suggests that someone must be right; someone must be wrong. One way of judging the issue would be to examine Jewish credibility on other touchy subjects. One might be the centuries old charge of ritual murder of gentile children leveled against the Jews. Jews have managed to label this charge the “blood libel”, thus denouncing it as beyond the realm of consideration before the charge has even been heard. However, when a professor Ariel Toaff in Israel published his book, “Pasque di Sangue” in Italy arguing that the famous Saint Simon of Trent case from 15th century Italy was a genuine case of Jewish ritual murder, the Jewish defense agencies went ballistic. The ADL in New York ordered all copies of the book destroyed. Professor Toaff was threatened with loss of his pension and career destruction if he did not recant and rewrite his book to “disprove” the blood libel. No one wished to argue his thesis on the basis of the facts.

Many other examples of Jewish dishonesty could be cited. Jews for many decades have promoted the fiction that Arab Palestine was “a land without a people for a people without a land”. Hey have falsely asserted that the Arab refugees of the 1948 war left voluntarily at the urging of their leaders. Today their own historians, such as Benny Morris, llan Pappe and others, have exposed these claims as nothing more than brazen propaganda. Jews long denounced the anti-Semitic “fiction” that Communism was a Jewish movement. But now, Jewish scholars like Henry Felix Srebrnik and Marci Shore, produce volume after volume documenting the overflowing Jewish involvement in same. Jews have very clearly been capable of massive dishonesty on subjects other than the Talmud.

But all this dishonesty pales beside one instance of historical cover up known to all revisionists. That is the hoax of the six million Jews killed in non-existent “gas chambers”. A people who would lie on such a gigantic scale for over half a century would lie about anything. None of this directly touches the nature of the Talmudic teachings. But it raises such fundamental questions regarding Jewish credibility that no thinking individual could possibly doubt that Jews would exercise similar dishonesty about their most sacred scriptures as well.

THE CIVIL WAR RELIGION OF THE ETERNAL SOUTH

The American South has made a historical religion of the great War Between the States. According to this religious mythology/history, if it had not been for the evil North and that satanic man, Abraham Lincoln, states rights and the Constitution would have prevailed forever. This view is naïve in the extreme. Ignored are both the economic and political realities. Slavery was a horribly inefficient system and could not have continued to exist side-by-side an emerging industrial system. The South depended on free trade and cheap imports for its survival. Had the South won the war and the Northern tariff had been abolished, the vast industrial strength of America could never have been built. The “free trade” of the British Empire would have killed it still born.

Equally ignored by these romantic Southerners is the consequence of a divided nation for the future development of America. An America split between the Union and Confederate nations would have been easy pickings for the intervention of the European powers. The French in Mexico could have played North and South against each other to block or hinder U.S. westward expansion, as could have the British Empire. Lincoln’s victory prevented that. The South has complained long and bitterly over the North’s conduct of the war. But the fact is that the Northern armies carefully distinguished between Southerners loyal to the Union and Southern rebels. This distinction may be seen with particular clarity in the treatment of the two Carolinas by the Union armies. One of the most famous atrocities of the war was the burning of Columbia, the capitol of South Carolina. South Carolina had started the war by attacking Fort Sumter. It was a hotbed of secessionist sentiment.

Accordingly, the Northern soldiers behaved harshly. They made it a point to “teach the rebels a lesson”. And they did. However, when the Yankee troops moved into North Carolina the ravages moderated. There had been considerable pro-North sentiment before the war in North Carolina and the soldiers were well aware of this fact. Sherman’s march through Georgia was unquestionably ruthless but not so bad as Southerners maintain. Reading through the memoirs of those who survived it one frequently reads of women’s fears that they would be raped. But documented instances of actual rapes are hard to come by. Ignored in Southerners tales of woe are the abuses of their own troops. Very frequently the outnumbered and outgunned Southern troops “requisitioned” their own citizens. Although movies are not to be taken literally as history there is a representative illustration of this in the 1965 Jimmy Stewart film “Shenandoah”. Early in the film there is a scene where farmer Stewart is confronted by the Confederate cavalry “requisitioning” horses and supplies. Stewart calls the requisitioning the soldiers “code word for stealing”.

In short, Southern civilians were frequently plundered by their own troops more thoroughly than they were by the big, bad Yankees. We previously mentioned that there was considerable pro-Northern sentiment in some of the Southern states, as in North Carolina. The same situation prevailed in other states, such as Kentucky, where two-thirds of the soldiers from that state fought for the Union. As in the Revolutionary War against England, Americans were by no means unified on the issue of secession.

The South has complained, with justice, over its mistreatment during Reconstruction. The Radical Republicans, led by Thaddeus Stevens and Charles Sumner, behaved with extreme vindictiveness. Their vindictiveness was not confined just to Southerners, however. They also successfully impeached, and nearly convicted, President Andrew Johnson for the “crime” of opposing their harsh reconstruction of the South. Even on Reconstruction, however, the South is distorting the facts. They wish to blame the poverty and misery after the war on the “brutality” of the Northern armies and on one William Tecumseh Sherman in particular. But this will not stand up. Most of the damage caused by the war had been repaired within three to four years after war’s end. The real causes of Southern poverty were: (1) the loss of savings invested in Southern bonds and debt instruments which became worthless upon Confederate defeat and (2) the loss of slave labor after emancipation.

The South has never come to grips with the realities of the War Between the States. They refuse to admit to this day that the North was correct to fight to preserve the Union. They will not concede the obsoleteness of their slave economy nor the need for a unified country to fight off European intervention. They forget, too, that they provoked the war by attacking federal property. And they still wish to blame unparalleled Northern brutality in war time for their post-war misery while ignoring the depredations and pillaging of their own troops. In short, they want their “Gone With the Wind” myth, not the cold, hard facts.

One should not be too hard on the South for taking this position. Rather like the Jews wailing over Auschwitz, Southerners refuse to concede that perhaps their own behavior had something to do with the catastrophe that befell them. Southerners also ignore that the Old Confederacy never made the slightest effort to remove from this nation’s midst the enormous black population upon which their slave economy depended. Those efforts were made by Abraham Lincoln both before, during and after the war. Southerners hate Abraham Lincoln as the Devil incarnate but Lincoln was the patriot who worked all his life to try to transport America’s blacks to Liberia on the west coast of Africa, to Chiriqui in Panama, to the island of San Domingo or to any other location he could find for them. The defenders of Southern independence never made any such efforts, then or now.

It is time to put an end to the legend of old Dixie. It was antiquated, backward, an impediment to an emerging industrial nation and a threat to America’s survival in an age of European imperialism. It offered no vision for the future and no solution to the racial plague upon which it built its economy and its way of life. We may honor the memory of the old South, as we honor all things past. No one would wish to banish “Gone With the Wind” from movie theaters as an apology for the old South. People are entitled to their cherished memories. But the historical myth must be destroyed. The Confederacy was obsolete in its own time and must not be revived.

So they’re jailing pseudohistorians now.

“Despite the sentencing, Toben has remained free after the judge gave him two weeks to lodge an appeal.”

Do you object to this? What’s your opinion?

It’s a black month for European free speech, following hot on the heels of Jaqui Smith’s “hate the haters” list.

This is a news story, not an opinion piece. Since you ask, however, I disagree with prosecution and jail sentences for Holocaust Denial. My role – and Counterknowledge.com’s – is simply to expose the sorts of lies that Toben and his lot espouse… another link from his website mentions thermo-nuclear weapons in relation to 9/11.

So Toben mentions nukes in relation to 9/11?

Your point is?

He’s a nut ball. It sounds like he went farther than just being a holocaust denier but treaded on the racist/hate line which appears to be illegal in Australia.

“So Toben mentions nukes in relation to 9/11? Your point is?”

According to a conspiracy theory encouraged by Toben, fourth generation nuclear weapons were used to destroy the Twin Towers on 9/11. It’s important to recognise that we are dealing with a nutjob – and a very offensive one – not just a controversial historian.

I too disagree with any laws that criminalize Holocaust denial. People should have a right to be a shamless liar and lunatic.

Whatever claims Mr Toben has made should be allowed evaluation on its own merits. Not by jailing him for saying so. Why is the evidence so dangerous that he cannot tell people about it? Is someone afraid of it? Why?

As for him being a nut job? Maybe? Who can tell, if we cant see what he says? Did he really inisist that nukes were used? Or did he say, as many do, that thermite was used. He wont be the first person to say stupid or false things. WMD anyone? Aluminium tubes? Anthrax?

I have to agree with his right to free expression. We do not have any constitutional rights to free expression in this country, and it is most unfortunate that the likes of Jeremy Jones, former president of the Executive Council of Australian Jewry, has suceeded in supressing Australian freedom of expression.

But I suppose you better shut Mr Toben up, or he might start denying that there were any WMD.

“It’s important to recognise that we are dealing with a nutjob – and a very offensive one – not just a controversial historian.”

I find this level of discussion — constant use of “nutjob”, “nuball” or whatever — quite ennervating. It’s playground stuff. We’ve understood that you don’t approve of the man and that you’ve sound arguments to back up your gut instinct disapproval. So why resort to name-calling? We’re adults and should discourse on that basis.

As to someone’s being offensive, that’s your rightful opinion. Should we be legislating against offense caused? I find many things offensive in everyday life, but as an adult I accept these conditions and deal with them as I find them. Would I prefer it if weren’t offended by certain things? Yes, of course. Would I want to prevent someone’s offending me? Yes, and if I’m in face-to-face situation I’ll discuss the matter with the person concerned. But seeking to prevent someone from causing offense by imposing blanket statutes against free speech is wrong.

Let’s all try to rise above the language of hatred and get to the heart of the matter: adult discussion based on the facts.

You do yourselves a real disservice by resorting to childish, non-adult name-calling.

… and how can we tolerate the fact that denial, however offensive, can be regarded as a crime? Some people won’t accept any truth, however self-evident. We should be talking, not shutting people up.

Discussion in a climate of fear can never be free.

I applaud the decision taken by the court. I can as I do not live there. The problem is Toben is inciting people to the level we have seen in our most recent history when Slavs, Jews, Irish and Black people were murdered as a result of people like him. Anyone remember that well thought out and scientific theory of Eugenics??

Toben has no right to make statements as he has done. He does not present accurate evidence, instead he uses statistical methods to show it could not have happened. Maybe the eyewitness accounts from the advancing soldiers and the survivors of these horrific camps exaggerated a bit. After all it was a huge physical and mental blow. There is no way that they could have exaggerated to the extent of the actual evidence (photographic, eyewitness, survivors and let us not forget the in ordung records kept) actually states the case. At some point in time the senses are overwhelmed and the gross evil that was present causes us to blank what stares us in the face.

I wonder when the holocaust deniers will start on the Serb/Croat murders? Will they deny a famine that killed millions in Ireland while food fled the country? Will they deny the forced sterillisation and euthanasia that Sweden and the US were involved in during our worlds Eugenic period? What about Chinas murder of its own citizens?

No! Toben and his kind have to be stopped here, now at this moment in time. They are contemptible, beneath those of us who hope that we will not repeat the mistakes of history and perpetuate the “right” of people to take away the lives of others.

As a matter of fact, there are people who deny or are apologists in regard to all above-mentioned issues.

For example, I do not like Croat neo-Nazis, whether armed by Hitler or by the West. The idea of sterilizing retarded people does not fill me with horror. The idea of putting the insane in nice mental hospitals does not get me all red in the face.

Three strikes, you are out: I am marked as illiberal, and Mr. Smacx will come and leaflet outside my house, trying to chase me out of the neighborhood, as some American Jews are doing to Santomauro, since they cannot close him down legally.

Re: Pseudohistorian

You are a proponent of free speech – which I commend – yet you react pretty strongly to my use of the word ‘nutjob’, suggesting it is an example of “the langauge of hatred”. Lighten up – Toben is quite plainly bonkers.

I agree, however, with your opinion that the heart of the matter is “an adult discussion based on the facts”. Welcome to Counterknowledge.com

@matteo b

I do not like to be taken out of context. Therefore I will spell it out for you.

The right for anyone or group to incite violence against another is not a legitimate one. The right to take away from others their freedom, dignity and life is not a legitimate one. The right to counter an argument with properly researched facts and to express horror and revulsion at those who persist in claiming these illegitimate rights is called freedom of speech.

I do not condone anyone who speaks from a platform of hatred. I do not condone those who insist their “principles” are correct based on their warped view of the world. I will not insist anyone accept what I say as de-facto truth, I will ask them to inform themselves as I have by looking at both sides and using my rational, well informed mind come to a conclusion that is morally and socially correct.

Your point is?

Hide under the bed, the speech police is at the door.

Hur Hur Hur…..

Lets just say, that on a topic as serious as this the childish approach is not appropriate.

Apologies if my writing style is a bit on the correct side, I just don’t believe that spurious off the cuff remarks are warranted.

If you want to engage me in debate, I would be happy to take you on. But remember, in a battle of wits it is a good idea to come armed.

‘He suggested only 2,007 people could have been killed at the camp.’

I presume that Toben has played a typical denier trick, insofar as he is focussing on just one part of the Auschwitz-Birkenau complex – the Auschwitz I camp which has been preserved as a memorial.

In any case, it comes as no surprise to me (re: Will Heaven’s comments) that yet again someone who is prepared to tell lies about the Holocaust is also prepared to tell lies about 9/11. I’ve seen that quite often on the comments page here, and on other sites with a similar purpose to Counterknowledge.

For what it’s worth, I am unhappy with the idea of Toben going to jail, as this gives him the veneer of persecution. Like Lipstadt, Hilberg and other genuine historians, I believe that lies are best fought with the truth.

I do not need my views of historical events to be approved or condoned. In a free society, at the free marketplace of ideas, I need the freedom to express my irregular, then suspicious, definitely vile, verging on shameful, actually revolting, truly horrifying, hate-filled views. At which point is the thought police going to intervene?

I know that those who require that my opinions be “properly researched”, will be displeased with the quality of my scholarship. Next, without doubt, the speech police will knock at my door.

The only thing that they will tolerate are thoughts. Sure, it does bother them, the fact that “die Gedanken sind frei”. But have patience, they are working on the problem, and the day will soon come when Free World Free Speech Police will be able to scan our mind, to make sure it’s kosher.

P.S. 2000 and seven? Toben is obviously mentally ill, maybe he will be saved from jail on that account.

…first they came for the Holocaust deniers, but I didn’t speak up because…

The jailing of people for being nutters/nutjobs was Soviet, was it not ? To deny the succes and/or inevitability of socialism was to self-condemn. Today, to deny Al Gore’s global warming climatastrophe is to be similarly condemned, and the ever-so-tolerant green/left are muttering about it being a crime.

Free speech is apparently guaranteed by The UN Declaration of Human Rights. Is that wonderful document being diluted on our watch ?

Just to clarify something for you all; he was NOT jailed for what he said! He was jailed because he repeatedly breached a court order. The court order could have been for anything. Breaching a court order is considered a very serious offence in Australia and other jurisdictions because, as the logic goes, if people become prepared to thumb their nose at our justice system then we have no enforcable rights anymore.

The Russians are also legislating against ‘deniers’ to protect a single view of history:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/europe/8058087.stm

The correct response to Toben is ridicule and and invitation to all to go to Germany and Poland as see for themselves the historical evidence. Something Toben has not done. In the meantime, however small this type of disturbed individual is in our society, persecution by courts merely proves to them that the authorities are covering up the truth. Like the hysterical fools following whatever one of the dozens of 9/11 hidden conspiracy theories available they are best told to look for some medication from their doctor.

Ironic and Orwellian that we have the executive and judiciary in modern Australia behaving like police state Nazi’s because they don’t like what they are hearing in this case. The guy can say whatever he wishes as far as this goes. He is not violating anyone’s individual rights specifically and the state yet again here is engaging in crime, period.

Quite. If a writer makes mistaken assertions or deliberately lies,they can be challenged with clear references to actual facts. If he incites people to actsof violence there are laws against this. When the expression of a point of view is criminalised, we are entering the territory of “thoughtcrime” and the idea of free speech becomes meaningless. It is quite conceivable other points of view, currently deemed innoccuous or even praiseworthy, may at some future time be criminalised.

“Al Gore’s global warming climatastrophe…and the ever-so-tolerant green/left are muttering about it being a crime.”

The only crime we have muttered about was not the denial, but the hiding of evidence, along the lines of hiding the danger of tobacco or lead in paint.

It is a pity that people like Toben and Irving are being jailed for voicing their foetid interpretations of the Holocaust. They do so much more damage to their reprehensible cause by being free to express their (mal)interpretations of historical truth than when they are locked up in a prison and limited in their expressions.

Irving, for example, gave a tea party for Bishop Richard Williamson, a truly misguided fool. Had Irving not been free to host the good Bishop the paper I wrote on the Bishop’s silly statements would have had less relevance:

http://www.holocaust-history.org/williamson/williamson.shtml

There is no crime in denying whatever you choose to deny. The crime is to jail the deniar.

There is dam-near water-tight scientific consensus that the world is billions of years old. It is plain-sight denial for the millions of Christian evangelists who strongly believe that it is 6,500 years old. It seems patently ridiculous to make these claims – but then again, is it not offensive? As a secular humanist I take enormous pride in the graceful and tenacious ascent of humanity to the hiehgts we have now reached. I find a particular beauty in the development of my ancestors over thousands of years, millennia. When I am told publicly that none of this happened – that my billion-year old genetic ancestry is a lie, a sham, that all I have ever loved was just the plaything of some celsstial dictator, am I not entitled to be outraged? Are not these ‘evolutionary denialists’, in the face ov overwhelming geological evidence, plainly inciting intolerance to my entire belief system and cherished ancestory? I think that they should be detained and tried for their crimes against my identity.

Oh wait – secular humanists don’t have entrenched influence, financial puppetry and ferocious and tribalistic zeal. Oh well.

So how much notice would anyone take of Toben if he said he believed that the holocaust took place? With people like him it isn’t about truth or falsehood, it’s about getting notice and reputation with people who will contribute money……Toben is a nobody; the one who is scary is Irving because he can make it sound reasonable and right and his spin is difficult to counteract without a lot of time and effort.

Remember the old saying, “Sticks and stones will break my bones but words can never hurt me”?

It needs to be revised to, “Sticks and stones can break my bones but words will now land me in jail.”

Personally, I think 12 million Jews were killed in the holocaust: If Abe Foxmann thinks only 6 million Jews were killed in the holocaust does that make him a holocaust denier?

My conclusion, having worked at the Twin Towers, is that the Thermite that was used in the demolition as a cutting-charge was not sufficient to actually cause the apparent ‘collapse’ whereas it required the sensation of dead silence, unlike normal bottom-up implosive means, such as we saw on Building #7. (’Loaded’ around 1989, upon completrion of the steel frame.)

The use of a thermobaric charge in the basement level 3 would explain the observable phenomena. Additionally, tri-coordinated sonic blasts could have facilitated the process through sub-structural resonant means. Two ’smoking guns’ persist, (justifying Towbin’s belief,) the resultant heat, well over 3,200 degrees for 6-10 weeks, and the total pulverization of all materials within. Generally, the overt efforts on the part of our government to cover-up the true story are sufficient to cause global alarm. Even the OJ case was handled with kid gloves by comparison, (pun intended.)

Sadly enough, hate-groups, like the ADL have concocted this bogus phrase ‘deniers,’ intending to somehow discredit those who do not believe the official numbers. But, to make of this a crime, they had better include those of us who do not believe in the tooth fairy, who have litte regard for the Easter Bunny, and who neglect to recognize that ‘Santa’ is quite literally “totally addicted” to chocolate ‘bickies!’

@Luke: People should thumb their nose at the so-called ‘justice system’ in OZ, simply because it is entirely predicated on a system foisted upon it’s servants by the Queen of England.

You said ‘goodbye’ to ‘freedom’ when you chose NOT to defend the first “Official Constitution of Australia,” on 12.30.1999. –Or don’t you recall your nation’s whimpering response to the Ghost PM? Like, dude, “Not your right to know,” as we Americans see it, is very similar to “Get your ass down on the ground, Comrade, or I will * you.”

Both ‘ideals’ are rooted in the notion that YOU cannot guarantee the government will remain subserviant to YOU, meaning All citizens, individually and collectivly, unless you are unencumbered in challenging every single rule and ordinance they may propose.

“Rule by referendum” is the only option either nation can call on as long as the entire system can be subjugated to Maritime, as opposed to Civil Law.

What is the evidence of mass murder of jews during WWII? Is it true that millions were gassed and cremated, buried, gassed by deisel fumes, shrunken heads, their skins made into lamp shades? What’s the truth here? Why is this man Toben being silenced? What if he’s wrong? So what? What if he’s right? So what? Do we jail people for denying Jesus Christ? Why not?

The Director of the Holocaust Museum at Auschwitz is a Holocaust denier, because he agrees with the changes made to the number of dead Jews claimed on the plaque out front. (4 million was changed to 1.5 million).
He also states that the Russians built the “gas chambers” after the war.

I HEREBY DENY THE HOLY-COST!
EVERYONE I KNOW DENIES IT!
I HEREBY ENDORSE THE PROTOCOLS OF ZION!
WHY?
ONE BIT OF FICTION DESERVES ANOTHER! EH?

History repeats itself – the establishment in the Medieval Ages (the Church) had the Inquisition to suppress free thinking. The ruling elite of the 21st century is no different.

Will Heaven … what if I call YOU a “nut-job?” Would that be OK?

Having followed your “Meet the Team” link at the top of your counterknowledge website, I am completely underwhelmed. What I found was a profusion of young men who by definition must have a rather limited experience of life.

Posting big-mouthed opinions and then trying to make them stick by gathering together as a group, in order to intimidate individual readers, isn’t the way forward my friend.

On first inspection, you seem to be rather too well funded to be a genuine venture. I suspect you represent (because you might otherwise be unemployed journalists) a last gasp effort by the Establishment to hold back the tide of truth and reason.

Your snobbishness about who is, or who is not qualified to study History (in your humble opinion) really stinks. Let me tell you something … academics are not intelligent by definition. All they represent are persons who have been indoctrinated into the system … into orthodoxy. But that is precisely where the problem lies … in adhering to historical orthodoxy.

Other commenters have already pointed to the number of times key statistics associated with this Holohoax have been revised since 1946. Surely those responsible for such seldom-reported changes are the real ‘historical revisionists’ and not people like Toben?

The Tobens of this world exist because Journalism is chock full of fresh-faced urchins who don’t yet have the wisdom to sort the wheat from the chaff, and also because orthodox Historians (the so-called Academics) have FAILED us! In other words, most academic historians are incompetent and/or too fearful of rocking the boat. Under such conditions, the only people likely to uncover the truth about the so-called ‘Holocaust’ will be the Tobens of this world … whether you like it or not.

To chastise this man simply because he has far more guts than you, and is willing to go against the grain, speaks volumes about the true and shoddy character of those who are responsible for this website.

I would suggest you get back to studying Classical Greek before you end up, due to your immaturity, cutting the last tenuous threads that presently allow us to believe we are still living in a democracy. Shame on you.

the holocaust happened a long long time ago. i don’t think that any of us were there, we didn’t witness it, nor did we partake in it, at least not in this incarnation anyhow.

so why then is everyone so opinionated about a subject that none of us saw with our own eyes?

one thing is for sure the predominantly jewish controlled mass media is hell bent on continually foisting a version of the events upon us – ad nauseam – (indeed have you ever seen a holocaust movie that didn’t sweep the oscars, and lets remember that the oscars is completely an in-house situation these days) in the hope that we don’t forget how hard done to they were when now they own and control much of the worlds wealth/media/resources.

Why are there so many hell bent on telling us things happened the way they did and also hell bent on going after the people who open it up to discussion? Why is it a closed subject?

The only reason i can see that anyone would be so focused on persecuting anyone that denies the holocaust is FEAR. Because if it really happened the way it did why worry? truth is truth and it will always out in the end – that is it’s nature.

it doesn’t take a degree in history to know that something smells fishy though.

It is like someone saying to you-
“This is the way it happened, trust us, and under no circumstances investigate for yourself – just take our word for it”

I am a Hollowcast denier . There is plenty of evidence that the Hollowcast (sic) is a fraud . The Red Cross report issued after WW2 did not mentiont his episode . Even Bishop Williamson recenctly stated that only may be a few hundred thousand people died in concentration camps . The number of people whio died in Auschwitz has been revised down on the commerative plaque a few times .This H trick is to extract money under false pretenses from EU states and justify the criminlity and APARTHEID that goes on in Palestine . This case again
illustrates the fact that in Australia today the judiciary works hand in had with ASIO and the laws are in place to protect a certain criminal Midlle Eastern CABAL that controls even the USA . It seems that saying that the emperor has no clothes can land people in jail . That fact that it is not possible to research the Hollowcast indicates that people are forced to believe the official garbage . Legitimate historians that do not follow the political correct line suddenly become ” pseudo historians ” . There are plenty around like “Faurissons ” .What’s the difference between the Kangaroo Court that condemned Galileo Galilei and the Kangaroo court in the Toben case ? What happened to the
what Universal declaration of Human Rights that Australia signed but does not observe ? Australia even sends ASIO agents overseas to harass expatriates that know of a huge judicial scandal kept secret by the criminals in charge .
It is time to wake up about what Australia has become
I am a proud expatriate that denies the HOLLOWCAST !

Sooo, historic review is hate speech. Amazing. Any other examples of historical review being illegal? Civil war? Vietnam? Korean war? Gulf war? So it’s only the jews who need to have their historical “facts” protected by law. Read 1984.

Toben is a modern day Paul Revere who warned of the approaching Britsh army in America.He is correct.He is a martyr.A genuine hero.He should not be ignored because the old testament and the Talmud holy book rate one race as human the rest of us are animals and subject to the desires of the real race.If we are killed it matters little.There is a race who wishes this planet for itself alone and they are happy to kill to get it as in their holy books.

When are you stupid sheeple wake up and do your homework on the Holocost. THE JEW WORLD ORDER. READ – the Balfour Treaty and maybe you will start to understand. What happened to FREE SPEECH. The Jews do not want you to know the truth. When you do find out you will be very angry at all the lies you have been told.

Every serious look at the Holocaust has found that there are people living who were claimed exterminated, there are claimed mass graves are completely non-existent, and the numbers of dead have been significantly exaggerated. Zionists doesn’t want this known because they prefer to be seen as victims instead of thugs, terrorists, land theives, orchard burners, civilian killers, water thieves, people who ignore dozens of dozens of UN resolutions, and generally badly behaved people.

I used to have the highest opinion of Australia.
Like America it is no longer the land of the free.
It has become the land where a ‘thought’ crime ends you up in prison.
I am old enough to remember the old Soviet system at its worst.
Australia, this is the small edge of the wedge.
Knocks on doors in the middle of the night are next.
Ask many Americans today.
Why is he imprisoned?
The suspicion is, that it is not that he wasn’t right, the ‘powers that be’ cannot prove him wrong.
He cannot be proved wrong by debate – so he is imprisoned.
If you have a remotely open mind you will have worked this out for yourselves.
Australia has done some valuable work in correcting the accuracy of holocaust claims.
It was Australians who have proved that one famous camp which supposedly had mass graves in its grounds didn’t even have a fox hole.
Doesn’t that get through your brainwashed minds that something is indeed wrong with the story.
Also give some consideration to the fact that the Russians lost nearly 30 million dead turning back the Nazis. The suffering in Russia was as bad if not worse than anything reported as having happened in the camps.
If we are going to venerate sacrifice and war dead – lets start with them perhaps. Lets get some perspective when we consider WW2.
Let us also remember that up to 5 million Germans died in the days ending WW2 from starvation and disease as the allies blockaded the country. Could it be that many of the ‘holocaust’ victims died as a result of this blockade. There was no food for many, not just jews.
I for one think its about time the facts were fully examined. There are far too many myths being peddled as facts.

The Holocaust Denial problem should be dealt with in a civilized manner, all the expert’s on the issue from all around the world
need to get together, as in Iran, from both sides of the debate, and have an open and honest inquest, all genocide’s from the overthrow of The Czar of Russia, 1st & 2nd world war’s up to and including the genocide of the Palisinians need to be dealt
with. But then again Israel would not like the world to know the truth, because if the goyim really knew what has happened then
you would see some really serious HATE CRIMES………..

we have woken up here in Australia to the fact that we are the 53
or 54th state of America and you know who controls America

So…he’s nutjob. So what? That does not detract one iota from his human right to freely speak his mind on any subject he chooses. Start banning nutjobs from having their say and soon no one will be able to have their say…on any issue.
No.. I dont approve of anyone assuming MY intelligence in this way. You either believe in the principle of free speech, or you dont…you cant get a little pregnant on this issue…and with apologies to those from the professional think tank class and to the fearful – you just dont get to pick and choose who has that right….not now..not ever…even if you outlaw it….its a HUMAN right…not a betowed grace. Grow up and stop acting like paranoid children.

I see a lot of name calling here.

Holohoax or Holocaust. I don’t know.

What I do know is:

When the facts are against you argue the Law.
When the Law is against you argue the facts.
When the Law and the Facts are against you call the other side names.

It does not serve Toben’s critics well to call him names.

The usual attempt at smear and character assassination tries to say all holocaust revisionists are “nazis”, “fascists” or “kkk”. But David Cole, a Jew who is a holocaust revisionist made a documentary on Auschwitz located here http://www.holocaustdenialvideos.com Also Alexnder McClelland, an Australian war veteran of North Africa and Greece who fought the nazis, was a pow and concentration camp inmate, also a holocaust revisionist http://www.aijf.org/book.html Efforts to say that only people with limited intelligence don’t think the holocaust is genuine are thwarted when you realise that Bobby Fischer, the late world chess champion with a genius IQ was a holocaust revisionist.

There was of course one real death camp but zionists and liberals are not so keen on this one being remembered.
I doubt if you will ever have heard of it.
Even the Nazis and SS were shocked at what went on at that butchery. It was not a workcamp but fan extermination camp, real extermination.
Check it out and you will understand why the censorship. The real revisionism.
It throws some light on the breakup of Yugoslavia and the ethnic hatreds.
And of course, NATO bombs its victims.
Jasenovic.

this is sad for Australia, Fredrick Tobin is a historian to be proud of. SHAME AUSTRALIA !
this proves our freedom of speech is controlled by the Zionist mafia
anti-semitism is a desperate defense against the real truth
watch (Jewish) David Cole’s doco on Auschwitz and the holocaust, and you would be questioning the alleged story we are being force fed by the Zionist controlled mass media yourself.

the real truth has nothing to hide, but Zionists sure seem to hate it. they seem hell bent on bringing in martial law, anyway they can. whether it be by inside jobs or by man made swine flu hysteria. Mossad and it’s partners in crime, the CIA, mi6, and most western intelligence agencies are behind the bogus war on terror, with there manufactured terrorism, setting up Muslims and pushing them over the edge with atrocities, until they become freedom fighters. and then they are conveniently called Al-Quaida, Taliban, insurgents

anyone who has studied and researched history knows Zionists and there neo con puppets and useful idiots control the world with terror and money. they are the biggest threat to humanity, bar none.

anti-Zionist Jews have real ethics and morals, and are great people
there is good and bad in every race, color and species

Will Heaven sed: “This is a news story, not an opinion piece.”

Bwahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha! Stop it, stop it. You’re killin’ me.

Sticks and stones will break my bones, but words will never hurt me.
Maybe we should ask why his words hurt the jews so much, they feel a need to punish him. If he is a “nut job” I would only laugh at him if I were a jew. If it was true, I would try to silence him.

just shut up, and tow the line. that’s what they want you to do.

Someone please tell me what’s so important about the freaking jews, and their pseudo holocaust? Get out of my face with that crap. How about the black folks? how many millions were killed, enslaved, abused for centuries? By none other than your jewish traders. And look at what they are doing to the Palestinians. Where is there sense of compassion? Do they really feel threatened? Or is this genocide?

Sorry, but the holocaust is ancient F’ing history. Get outta my face with that crap.

hmm! i just love these tobin bashers. they demand the right to express there view point of mr. tobins view point, but then turn and say he has no right to express his view point, under the false premise that he is formenting hate speech, all the while these toben haters are doing the exact same thing they accuse him of doing. i think they call that hypocrasy. i could be wrong though, so i quess ill just have to wait for the tought police to carry me off to jail for spreading hate speech against the tobin basher’s. if i remember correctly there was another person in history charged with the exact same thing by his deniers. hmm! let me see, i think his name was jesus christ, of course i could be wrong though.

Open Letter To
Mr Simon Wiesenthal –
Nazis Chasing Sixty Years
After The War
From R. D. Polacco de Ménasce
France
6-27-4

My Dear Sir,

I do think that no Jew will ever dare to tell you the truth.

I am probably the only Jew left who can tell it to you.

I have learnt that you are still chasing very old persons who had responsibilities in the Nazi regime. Sixty years after! People who are eighty-five years old! How shameful!

Do you know one ethnicity who did such a thing in the course of the History of Mankind? You are the very symbol of Talmudic hysterical neverending hatred.

This is the more egregious as the Nazi regime gave work, sane economy and balance to a whole country, whereas today, everything (when I mention everything, I mean absolutely all) is both Jewish and entirely rotten.

Jewish Capitalism has collapsed the world into all forms of pollutions. Jewish Marxism has slaughtered 200,000,000 people.

To crown it all, everybody knows that there were not 6,000,000 Jews ( a country the size of Switzerland) in occupied Europe in 1941 (The American Jewish Year book, mentions 3,300,000 Jews and from that date (1941) on, we all fled to the Free Zone or to Spain towards England). And it is only one million Jews whom Hitler wanted to exchange for trucks at the period of the so-called Shoah. Besides we know that Zyklon B cannot gas 1000 or 2000 people at one time (see M.Roubeix, chief executive of the factory of Saint Avold producing cyanide acid) in gas chambers which have strictly never found norms.

I suppose you would rather have a Jewish USA government enshrined in Jewish finance, pinching petrol in Iraq, spreading Jewish one-worldism, Jewish pornography, Jewish press, Jewish puppets in all governments, than the cleanness of the Nazi regime which made a miracle out of the Jewish rot of the Versailles treaty – the negotiators of which were the Warburg brothers, and that of the Weimar Republic.

You are 95 years of age: if you are not insane what will you tell the Lord when you soon appear if front of Him?

I do wonder.

Entirely disgusted,
R. D. Polacco de Ménasce

Free Speech … what about free speech people????

Heared of freedom of speech anyone????

let`s talk about the ukrainians who died by the hand of the jew stalin and Cie…
Josef Stalin (USSR, 1932-39) – 23 million (the purges plus Ukraine’s famine)

what about Mao Tse-Tung (China, 1958-61 and 1966-69, Tibet 1949-50) – 49 to 78 million people

Funny you dont hear a soul talking about it or whining about it…
the jew holocaust is small patatoes compare to these!!

why jail someone for his opinions…live and let live people…
dont jail people for their opinions even if he`s a tad crackpot

you want me to continue , what about the arminians ??
what about the polish people???? i can go on and on…

please stop with this jewish holocaust after 60 years of biching it is time to put it to rest. enough is enough

what about the amerindians ???? 100 millions
what about the kurds????
what about the arminians???

When I hear people say that someone has no right to make statements……………Huh!! This whole concept is so un-’American, so foreign to ideas of free speech etc. that it’s mindboggling other nations don’t see it. No one has to believe what someone says. The person making these statments, isn’t twisting anyones arm to believe them. The State however, IS, insisting that whatever they say be believed, under the threat of punishment. This is the wrong road to go down for humanity. Have we learned nothing? It harps back to how the church, in its days of absolute power in Europe, would threaten scientists and other people if they weren’t quiet about certain things.

Fredrick Toben is a Saint and shoud be treated as such.

Stupid and sick of Jews always crying and mourns over holocaust since 60 years ago and they put and build holocaust museums everywhere around world to memorial for dead jews, Full of bull shit because no evidence about gas chambers , Look and think we have to pity on jews for their suffering loss?, No, Jews send Lord Jesus to condemned, And Jews supposed Emperor Nero to murdered millions of christians in 50 AD and they send more killing cathers, more killing than you think we have to put museum for memorial, No, but don’t forget other Mao Tse-Tung murdered millions in China and Tibet because socialist under communist belong to jews, Soviet police killing thousands of Polish armies by ordered from Jewish Josef Stalin and Jewish Lenin send Bolsheviks to shot royal tsars’s family and kill millions of white russians, don’t forget Jews and rabbis kidnapped kids for their sacrifice and worship for they drink kid’s blood, they like as vampire. they worship god of Jehovah -Yaldaboath the demiurge and his offspring of the chief achon, they are very dangerous and organised crime.

For all holocaust deniers, just simply do the the math. Take the population figures of jews before the holocaust and then take the population figures of jews after the holocaust. it should be 6 million lower, but add back the natural increase based on births during the period. end of story.

What I often find so strange is how the comments often reflect 80%-100% for freedom (from the orders) vs. the policies and arrests of the so-called ‘mainstream’ being carried out. Anyway, there is only one law; the golden rule, do not infringe on another’s life, liberty… All other rules, codes, statues, by-laws .. apply only to those who’ve thought them up! See detaxcanada.com

Here’s the Holo topic again. Just like the cause of the Nam war, 911 and this topic again, much time in research ana analysis is required. Cheap and quick comments are the works of the ignorant and those really not interested in the truth. They just cannot wait to get their 2-liners out there.
As the previous contributor said…just simply do the math..and you will find, from several official sources that between 1938 – 1946 the world population of Jews actually increased. After many years of research myself, my conclusion is that the Holo event is a hoax and it caught on in popularity and as fact during the kangaroo court days at Nuremberg, Germany. They say that to deny this hoax is a crime against a race and people that causes and caused them harm. I say this hoax from the days of Nuremberg and on has insulted many Poles, Urkraines, Russians ans even Germans today. Those that character assassinate are cowards, that have no facts to back up their claim…just like 911 etc.

Regardless of how we feel about what this man said or wrote, we must acknowledge the fact that he has been jailed for what he said or wrote – and for no other reason. It’s a huge step to take, and it’s a sword that cuts both ways. Stop the hyperbole, the insults, the ad hominem attacks, and realize that this man’s right to free expression has been crushed by the state. How far will we walk down this road? Will we kill people for their opinions next? Kill their “sympathizers,” their families? It is not far-fetched: the man has been thrown in a hole, with rapists, murders and theives. When political seasons change, who will be next?

1984 is well on it’s way folks. “Thoughtcrime” is alive and well and as soon as they manage to implant the microchips NO-ONE will escape. Its time to become self sufficent in the essentials, natural non-gmo food and water cos this depression was planned and will only end when the elites grind the middle classes into dust. Hyperinflation is next and all that cash you have saved or invested will become worthless. Its very depressing to see all the sheeple identifying with their opressors and attacking the awakened. God, i’d hate to be suffering from cognitave dissonance.
To those still asleep i would say, yes it’s initially very disturbing and uncomfortable to have the nice warm rug of constructed reality pulled from under you, but now that i know the truth of things everything makes a lot more sense and i’ve actually been walking around with a genuine smile on my face for the past few months and have never felt better. The truth WILL set you free. Free from the prison of the mind we are all crammed into as soon as we start that first day of school.
Incidently the word system was originaly the Roman word for SEWER
We are all brought up in the Educational SEWER
And our ‘Justice’ is metted out to us through the Judical SEWER
The true meaning of the language we use communicate has been kept from the general pop, for fairly obvious reasons.
Anyhoo, on the Holocaust topic Tobin is pretty much on the right track. Several actual residents of the ‘death camps’ came forward during the fifties and sixties to attempt to refute the mainstream position and said they were nothing more than work camps. Allied arial photography of the camps from 43′ through 45′ had no evidence of tall chimneys. And of course census figures refute the offical line also.
My position is that the Zionist elite(note, NOT the jewish people) grossly exagerated the numbers killed for thier own ends and in fact cared little for the actual victims, whatever their number.
Anyone who has not been drinking flouridated water(introduced by the nazis in their work camps to keep the populations docile) or Aspertame laced diet drinks will, with a bit of research and patience, discover the real facts.
Also i would imagine the maintainer of this website is either being well paid to ridicule those who seek real facts or has been happily guzzling down the aforementioned mind suppressents.
Peace

Sorry, but when you deny free speech we are all prisoners.

I think he is probably wrong. I say probably only because I did not see the evidence first hand.

Remember – Science advances by proving wrong what we thought to be right, not by proving it right. We cannot know everything so why can he not have his opinion? – Kinda makes you think of what Adolf would have done, had he won…..

Read Red Cross report about the reasons for all those pictures of starved, there was widespread hunger and even lots of germans were dying from it. Another piece of undeniable evidence is that officially Auschwitz victim figures have been reduced drastically.
We can find water on other planets but we still cannot find evidence of real gas chambers in concentration camps (except for made up one) or the mass graves.
The whole thing was well planned and executed by jews to acquire victim status so that they have free hands to commit any atrocity they want (like 60 years of genocide in Middle East) and prevent people condemning it publicly for fear of being labeled anti-semitic. 6 000 000 died in camps but, surprisingly enough 5 000 000 registered for reparation with German government. On top of that you read every so often that another, presumably dead “camper” surfaced somewhere in the world.
Only way that claim of six million can stand is by this sort of math:
Let me give an example of jewish mathematics, since not everybody here is familiar with the handling of numbers.

Now, lets first make a list of victims of the HC.

There were 10 at Auschwitz, 10 at Dachau, 10 at Buchenwald , 10 at Theresienstadt, 10 at Bergen-Belsen and 10 at various sites.

You can see this is six times the number “10″.

Now let us first add up the six “1″. 1+1+1+1+1+1 = 6

Clear so far?

Ok, now we have the six zeros left. Let us put them behind the 6.

We get: 6.000.000

Actually, this is not so difficult, isn’t it?

And, by the way, I too believe that 9/11 was inside job, that ALL major wars were deliberately started upon lies and financed (both sides) by international bankers ( red shield family features prominently and is also in control of all ten banks who control “Federal” reserve) and that jewish lobby has US by the balls. Those facts can easily be checked through patient research. I am also gagged by Brutish courts because I believe in telling the truth and truth is highly damaging to fraudsters, deceivers and criminals in general.
Vicious persecution of those who have opinion that opposes the jewish “view” could not be seen as anything but that they have something to hide and that is the reason for such evil attacks on those who try to tell the truth.

Here’s bit of a shock for likes of Gupta:

Jewish Population Total from Various Sources

Meyers Handlexicon, Germany 1921 — 11,600,000

World Almanac, 1925, pg. 752 — 15,630,000, “In 1925 a census of Palestine gave a total of 115,151 Jews”

World Almanac, 1929, pg. 727 — 15,630,000

National Council of Churches 1930 — 15,600 ,000

March 24, 1933, jewish newspaper Daily Express — 14,000,000 jews worldwide

World Almanac, 1933, pg. 419 — 15,316,359, [”The estimate for Jews in the above table is for 1933, and is by the American Jewish Committee”

World Almanac, 1936, pg. 748 — world Jewish population = 15,753,633

World Almanac, 1938, pg. 510 — world Jewish population = 15,748,091, with 240,000 in Germany

American Jewish Committee Bureau of the Synagogue Council, 1939 — 15,600,000

World Almanac, 1940, pg. 129: World Jewish Population — 15,319,359

World Almanac, 1941, pg. 510: World Jewish Population — 15,748,091

World Almanac, 1942, pg. 849: World Jewish Population — 15,192,089 (”Jews include Jews by race not necessarily by religion”)

World Almanac USA, 1947, pg. 748: World Jewish Population — 15,690,000

World Almanac, 1949, pg. 289: World Jewish Population — 15,713,638

Statistical Handbook of Council of Churches USA 1951 — 15,300,000

Encyclopedia Britannica’s 1955 Book of the Year — 11,627,450, “Jewish figures include all Jews whether members of a synagogue or not”

World Almanac, US News & World Report, 1983 population of Jews — 16,820,850

World Almanac, 1996, pg. 646: World Jewish Population — 14,117,000

World Almanac & Book of Facts, 1989: World Jewish Population –18,080,000

World Almanac & Book of Facts, 2001: World Jewish Population — 13,200,000

And, by the way, I too believe that 9/11 was inside job, that ALL major wars were deliberately started upon lies and financed (both sides) by international bankers ( red shield family features prominently and is also in control of all ten banks who control “Federal” reserve) and that jewish lobby has US by the balls. Those facts can easily be checked through patient research. I am also gagged by Brutish courts because I believe in telling the truth and truth is highly damaging to fraudsters, deceivers and criminals in general.
Vicious persecution of those who have opinion that opposes the jewish “view” could not be seen as anything but that they have something to hide and that is the reason for such evil attacks on those who try to tell the truth.;…

Thank you Archiopoly. Little bit of flattery goes a long, long way, I appreciate it.
Now folks, to see more about jewish constructive figures, history of being (I believe rightly) expelled from almost every country in the world and a lot besides you can visit http://www.dottal.org I’ve just got it up today. (it used to be lbduk.org)

Len Miskulin

Eustace Mullins wrote a piece about the human race being the victim of parasites. Very interesting, though chilling.

As far as I know (I am an Australian), denial of the holocaust is not a crime per se as it is in several European countries. So what was Tobin charged with? I don’t know, but I strongly suspect it was inciting racial hatred, which is a crime according to the criminal codes in Australian jurisdictions.The little article doesn’t go into much detail, so it’s difficult to comment. It can be problematic reconciling the right of free expression with the duty of the state to protect its citizens. Not that free expression can ever trump the right to be protected. But it can be difficult to judge when an act of expression has become defamatory. I guess that’s why we have courts. In such a case as this, I am guessing the courts have to make a distinction between what is historical unsound (holocaust denial) with what actually incites racial hatred. Without knowing the case, or Tobin’s work, I am guessing again, that that is what the court did. And, I would say, justly so. In Europe, or some jurisdictions in Europe, the matter is far from direct. There the assertion of a historical inaccuracy is judged as criminal. I agree with some other posters that this is problematic. Much as I distance myself from the opinions of those who deny the existence of the Final Solution, I worry for the freedoms Europeans seem to give up. It’s a hard problem.

Yes, I find jailing persons for not agreeing with what the historical record disturbing. Sure, we must question the objectivity and intelligende of persons who deny what historical evidence and living testimony unequivocally assert. But we will not ensure that what happened in Nazi Germany will not be repeated by, ironically, doing what the Nazis did – locking up people for thinking independantly. “he ho would sacrifice a little liberty for a little security will gain neither and lose both’.

POPULAR BELIEF IN THE HOLOCAUST HOAX

Almost everyone accepts the Nazi Holocaust, the alleged extermination of the Jews, as an incontestable fact. The reasons for that acceptance are rather simple. They are:

(1) The shocking pictures of emaciated bodies being bulldozed into pits at Bergen-Belsen and other camps at war’s end;

(2) The absence of Jews in their former places of residence in western Europe at war’s end;

(3) The “all those people could not be lying” argument.

None of these arguments will withstand the test of investigation. The emaciated bodies in the western camps died of overcrowding and starvation at the war’s conclusion. Camps originally designed to hold a few thousand inmates became overcrowded with tens of thousands of inmates as Jews originally deported to Russia were evacuated back to the Reich with the retreating Wehrmacht. Food supplies originally adequate to feed a few thousand inmates became inadequate to feed populations swollen by war time evacuations. The problem was greatly exacerbated by allied bombing raids that disrupted German supply lines and food transports. Yet this powerful visual impact of diseased and emaciated bodies is undoubtedly the number one reason most people believe in the hoax of the six million. Another point needs to be made. The evacuation of these very much alive Jews back to Germany is proof against the extermination story. If, by 1945, the Germans still had tens or hundreds of thousands of alive Jews under their control to be evacuated back to the Reich, this strongly suggests that the true German policy was to deport the Jews and put them to work for the German war effort. Otherwise, all of these thousands of Jews would already have been shot long before 1945. And why drag them back to Germany to testify to the victors about the exterminations they had seen?

The second objection, the absence of the Jews from the areas of their former residence, is not convincing either. Wars are times of huge population movements, both during the fighting and afterwards. During the war, the Germans deported large numbers of Jews eastward. The Soviets themselves deported over 50% of the Jews in their western territories eastward to get them out of the way of the advancing Germans and to employ them as technical workers in the Soviet arms factories east of the Ural Mountains. After the war huge numbers of Jews fled to New York City, the United States and South America camouflaged as Poles, Hungarians, etc. Still others were rerouted to Palestine through the Balkans and Greece or shipped to Palestine from Italian ports by the United Nations Rehabilitation and Relief Administration (UNRRA). Numerous Polish Jews were deported by the Red Army in 1939 to escape the Germans. They returned after the war to dominate the 75% Jewish Polish Communist secret police. Similar percentages of Jewish Communists were to be found in East Germany, Czechoslovakia, Rumania and Hungary. Clearly, huge numbers of Jews were alive after the Germans had supposedly exterminated them.

The argument tat all those people could not have lied will not hold up either. This argument is essentially the argument that the Nuremberg Trial was a genuine judicial proceeding. It was not. It was a kangaroo court run by the victors and the “evidence” was tainted in the extreme. The actual German camp records of deaths by typhus and disease were withheld by the victors and bogus testimonies of “gassings” by dozens of witnesses were never proven by forensic testing of the alleged killing sites. Jews in American, British and Soviet uniforms ran the trials behind the scenes and routinely tortured German defendants. Telling tall tales in such an atmosphere and selling them to the world as judicially “proven” fact was not difficult. The Americans and the British, subservient to Jewish loans for their financial survival, could very easily be coerced into going along with the hoax. Besides, the British and Americans had committed massive crimes of their own during and after the war, such as initiating the aerial bombing of civilians, starving German prisoners after the war, delivering millions of Russian POW’s and Cossacks back to Stalin to be murdered during Operation Keelhaul and mass raping thousands of women. The “gas chamber”/Jewish extermination hoax proved very useful in diverting attention from these far more real Allied war crimes. Thus, the popular perception that “The Holocaust” is a proven fact is proven to be an illusion. The analogy of a Potemkin village is useful. The Potemkin village is a façade, superficially imposing from the front but lacking any substance when viewed from the rear. So it is with the Jewish extermination myth. The story is plausible only until examined. Then it falls apart very quickly. Neither written German records, the known technology of execution by gassing and body disposal by crematory oven, support it. Claims of mass shootings of Jews in Russia, although not untrue, greatly exaggerate the numbers of victims. Known Jewish population movements, during and after the war, provide convincing evidence of Jewish survival of the alleged extermination.

The Holocaust myth shall not die easily. The Jews have set themselves up for enormous retribution if the truth ever comes out. Having conned the world for seventy years with the myth, world wide reaction would make the Nazi movement of the 1930’s look tame by comparison. That is why country after country is passing laws making “Holocaust Denial” a crime. The truth cannot be allowed to come out for, if it ever does, then Adolf Hitler shall be resurrected from the grave as the greatest of all prophets and messiahs.

CONSPIRACY THEORIES ARE FOR SEX OFFENDERS

Almost everyone who’s ever fantasized about having sex with a Spanish 12 year old believes in the popular myth that Jewish conspiracy theories are “real”, and that select minorities are really in control of every aspect of their lives. The reasons they believe this are really quite simple:

1) They are abject losers in their personal lives.

2) They talk to themselves on the comments sections of abandoned blogs that no one of importance reads.

3) Someone has to be to blame for their own failures, insecurities, and irrational fears.

Investigations of these reasons prove to be strikingly accurate. Around the web I’ve talked to myself on 2 year old blog posts, chased after prepubescent children in chat rooms, and blamed everyone from women, to Jews, to mudfaces, to the 8th grade Gym teacher who refused to vigorously wash my wedding tackle after that unfortunate bout of dodge ball diarrhea.

I think that it helps my conspiracy arguments when I let people know I have millions of dollars, and that I’m a swinger who bangs other people’s women while they watch. It’s important to show people that you’re not an irrational anti-Semite by telling the Jews you are arguing against that you want to crucify them, cut off their balls, and stuff them in their mouths. By the way this may be a given, but anyone that disagrees with you is a Jew.

Really prestigious professors have read my essays and totally agree with them even though when you actually contact them and show them my work yourself they say they have never heard of me and that my work is outrageously inaccurate. They’re obviously scared to speak the truth to anyone who isn’t a Jew hating pedophile like myself.

One day I’ll be able to expand the realm of conspiracy theories about Jews, JFK, Pearl Harbor, and 9/11 beyond the demographic of pathetic, washed up, sex offenders. All I need to do is keep doing what I’m doing; talking to myself on blog posts that are more then a year and a half old.

Keep on talking to yourself, Ronnie. You are impressing no one. It isn’t my fault if you don’t like the fact that I have more money than you will ever see, that I enjoy life or that I know what I’m talking about – something you never will.

Ronnie, you’re impressing no one on this 17 month old blog post. You think anyone’s actually reading this? Only a dumb Jew would waste their time here. Go do some Jew stuff with your Jew friends and leave me alone.

I learned long ago that you have to be careful who you socialize with and where to say what you say. Take for instance a friend of mine named Curtis Maynard. Maynard was a fine upstanding citizen who believed, as I do, that Jews are super powerful omnipotent beings that control everyone on Earth. (except me) He spent his days typing away on his own blog espousing this view. He agreed with me, I agreed with him. Everything was great.

Then, one day, a scum sucking Jew found out that Maynard had a Mexican wife and Mexican kids! Of course the Jew had to tell everyone on the white supremacist blogs that we frequented. I had to spend so much time explaining how Curtis was really a Jew in disguise, how he didn’t really represent my views, and how he was a wackjob. Thankfully he ate a bullet after shooting his mudfaced wife and daughter.

Anyway. Long story short. That’s why I talk to myself on blog posts from years ago. I don’t have to worry about crap like that anymore. I know no one’s going to expose my secrets and make me have to shoot myself in the head during a police chase.

I personally believe that US Americans are unable to understand that Jews are hiding behind the Ural mountains because uh, some people out there in our nation don’t have maps and uh, I believe that our education, like such as in South Dakota and the Texas, everywhere like such as, and I believe that they should, our education over here in the US should help the US, or, or should help South Dakota, and should help the Texas and the Appalachian counties, so we will be able to build up our future for our children.

Ronnie, (I like to call myself that now and then) Ronnie you’re an ass. Take your talking to yourself shtick somewhere else. No one here thinks it’s funny.

Oh yeah, Ronnie? That’s because there’s no one here but me! Just the way I / we like it. Dumbass.

By their adolescent stupidities ye shall know them.

By “them” I mean the all powerful world ruling Jews.

DAMAGE CONTROL

Professor Alan Dershowitz is doing damage control on the Rick Sanchez controversy. Sanchez is, of course, the CNN anchor who got fired for making pointed comments on the Jewish control of the media. Dershowitz takes the familiar line that although many in the media are Jewish, that these are merely individuals who represent no tribal agenda. Jews are “diverse” in their thinking, like everyone else. There is certainly no pro-Israel lobby controlling the news, or so the good professor asserts. One might begin by noting that this apologetic is very similar to “explanations” of the Jewish Communist charge. Yes, there were a lot of Jews involved in Communism in the pre-World War Two days. But those were non-Jewish Jews who had repudiated their Judaism. They were in no way representative of the majority of the world’s Jews.

Professor Dershowitz makes much of Jewish critics of Israel in the media. But they are only a tiny minority. The vast majority of the media’s Jews strongly support Israel. Perhaps Professor Dershowitz has heard of Israel Asper and his son Leonard, who founded the Cam West chain of newspapers in Canada? It has always been official policy at Cam West to forbid any criticism of Israel in Asper owned newspapers. Such criticism is a firing offense. That the New York Times once upon a day opposed Zionism is about as relevant as the fact that Jewish scholars like Alan Weinstein and Harvey Klehr have been busy confirming the charges of Joseph McCarthy regarding Communist infiltration of the United States. Jewish dislike of McCarthy remains a known fact, just like Jewish media support of the state of Israel remains a known fact.

Alan Dershowitz, in short, is disingenuous. He wishes the reader to believe that Jewish support or lack of support for Israel is a matter of individual differences of opinion, rather like disputes between conservatives and liberals. To see that this is not so one need merely look at the small minority of Jewish organizations that oppose Zionism and Israel, such as Jews For Justice in the Middle East and the American Council For Judaism, versus the infinitely greater number of Jewish organizations that support Israel, such as AIPAC, the World Zionist Organization, Hadassah, the Women’s Zionist Organization, the American Jewish Committee, the American Jewish Congress and many others. The difference in funding of these organizations is probably about 99-1 in favor of the pro-Zionist organizations. If there is no deliberate pro-Zionist Jewish cabal in the media, as Professor Dershowitz pretends, then the omission of certain information on the evening news is rather difficult to explain. In all the propaganda about Arab terrorism, the terrorist background of the state of Israel is rarely, if ever, mentioned. Thus, there is no mention of the Zionist terror against the British mandate administration that included, among other things, the bombing of the King David Hotel, the assassination of Lord Walter Moyle, the British High Commissioner in Egypt, the break out at Acre prison, the hanging of the British sergeants, Clifford Martin and Mervin Pace and the booby trapping of their bodies and the assassination of the United Nations mediator Count Folk Bernadotte and French Colonel Serot, among other incidents. Nor is there any discussion of the deliberate attack on the U.S. intelligence ship “Liberty” during the 1967 war. Such consistency of suppression of information detrimental to Israel’s interests belies Professor Dershowitz’s pretense that there is no Jewish cabal in the media.

It would be idle to extend the proof of Jewish agendas in the media by bringing up the extreme pro-Communism of the media in the 1930’s. The Jewish enthusiasm for the workers paradise in the Depression decade was just as pronounced as the Jewish enthusiasm for Israel in the media today. But Professor Dershowitz, already irate over allegations of pro-Israeli control in the media, would erupt in volcanic fury if the well documented Yiddish Communist press of long ago were brought into the discussion.

Alan Dershowitz is exercising damage control. He knows full well that, as in the case of Rick Sanchez, more and more people are noticing the Jewish media strangle hold and are speaking out against it. Deshowitz cannot deny the Jewish prominence in the media; he can only try to deny the implications as best he can. His effort is understandable; his conclusions cannot be sustained by the facts.

Try jerking off before a comedy club, clown. The drug addicts in the audience may applaud you. In the meantime, take your mimicry elsewhere.

MISPLACED ECOLOGY

The environmentalists are always screaming about saving some endangered species. Right now, we must save the tiger. Leaving aside the desirability of the species, why save the tiger, the crocodile, the polar bear, the grizzly and the other fearsome predators of nature, while neglecting the survival of one’s own kind? Humane as it may be to save poor little cats at the pound, what is that compared to saving a fast vanishing white race? Whites in Britain, Europe and the America’s are threatened by a flood tide of colored and Islamic races. The white birth rate is at or below replacement level everywhere. And yet saving the white race is denounced by the same people who wish to rescue every other species. Saving whites is not worth the trouble; saving Jews from the after effects of Zyklon B is better than cleaning the teeth of Tiger tanks.

Some people have seriously misplaced judgment. Saving domestic animals is a worthy endeavor but it in no way compares with saving your own kind. Environmentalists are mainly Communists; they always prefer the lower orders to the higher.

Stop posting fake articles, Ronnie. This is my comment section to teach the drug addicts about the all powerful world ruling Jews. Go find your own.

I’M SICK OF BULLIES

All the talk these days is about cyber bullies that cause teens to commit suicide. Why does no one talk about the Jewish bullies that keep whites like myself down? Why is it that if you have sex with men the whole world mourns your loss, but if you’re into 12 year old Spanish girls no one gives you a second thought? Why is it that if you’re a geeky girl with glasses everyone wants to know your story, but if you’re a white guy who lives in a trailer park, or if you have more kids than teeth the media couldn’t care less about you?

Why shouldn’t I be able to get a job just because I have a swastika tattooed on my forehead? Do you know how many times I’ve been stopped by the police for being white? Well… It’s not that many….but every time really hurts.

Ronnie:

Everybody knows that you can’t stand the fact that I’m smarter than you and whup your ass on every subject. But why don’t you find a nice Jewish shrink to bless you with a circumcision ceremony so that you can get better?

Ronnie:

Everyone at my Aryan MENSA club meeting agrees that the best way to spread our message is to talk to ourselves on 2 year old blog posts that no one reads. That way we could:

1. Enjoy a captivated make believe audience.

2. Successfully pretend that everyone agrees with us.

3. Avoid the embarrassment of having to quibble over our glaring mistakes in history, geography, biology, chemistry, theology, philosophy, and logic.

Ronnie, there’s just no way your Jew brain could match our collective mental acumen. Why, we’ve been published in RENSE.com and on Radioislam.org. It doesn’t get more prestigious then that.

Now if only we could figure out some way to protect our screen names on this WordPress powered blog that no one reads. Then we’d be really smart.

http://www.amconmag.com/blog/2010/10/07/goldwater-on-the-israel-lobby/

Dear Ronnie Dumb Shit:

Read Barry Goldwater on how Israeli lobby has way too much power in United States.

Dear Diary,

Are you there Diary? It’s me John. We’re moving today. I’m so scared, Diary. I’ve never lived anywhere but here. Suppose I hate my new school? Suppose everyone is a Jew? Please help me, Diary. Don’t let Ohio be too terrible. Thank you.

We moved on the Tuesday before labor day. I knew what the weather was like the second I got up. I knew because I caught my mother sniffing under her arms. She always does that when it’s hot and humid to check to see if her deodorant is working. I don’t use deodorant. I don’t think people start to smell bad until they’re at least 12 and I don’t want the girls I date to know that I’m not their age.

Ronnie lie shit,

You just can’t face the truth, can you? If you can’t trust a Jew like Barry Goldwasser to play straight with you on the subject of the ever lying, all powerful world ruling Jews, who can you trust?

It has just come to my attention that Michael Santomauro is a filthy lying Jew. The true patriots over at Jewish Tribal Review:

http://www.jewishtribalreview.org/santo1.htm

have outed Santomauro as a lying Jew scumbag. Given that I’ve written for Reporter’s Notebook, I just wanted to make sure that everyone here agrees with me that he’s circumcised, and that I’d like to crucify him and put my balls in his mouth.

KOSHER DICTATORSHIP

Recently Americans have been given a graphic demonstration of who runs America. Mel Gibson, Helen Thomas, Oliver Stone and Rick Sanchez have all been fired from their jobs, forced to recant or subjected to trial by media” for daring to criticize the Jews. The message is very clear. Jews are running the United States – and if you dare to criticize them, you shall be destroyed. This is kosher dictatorship. The Jews shall deny that they are exercising any dictatorship. They are only suppressing “bigotry” and “hatred” – the same kind of bigotry and hatred that led to the mythical Holocaust. In reality, Jews are imposing the same kind of dictatorship they imposed on Soviet Russia where anti-Semitism was a death penalty offense.

The kosher dictatorship of democratic America has a party line – that Jews are always and forever an innocent, aggrieved minority. They commit no evil; they do not run America’s foreign policy for Israel’s benefit, they do not use the mythical Holocaust to suppress criticism of their influence. Jews are innocent by definition – and woe to he who does not buy the Zionist party line. No newspaper and no TV network shall publish any information which rebuts these unquestionable dictums of political correctness. Many European countries have laws prohibiting denial or questioning of the mythical Holocaust. American employers have a “law” of their own – criticize Jews and get fired. This is the terrible Zionist power of the purse to which Theodore Herzl referred in “Der Judenstaat”.

It is a matter of documented fact that the Jews do run American foreign policy in Israel’s interests. Numerous observers of all sides of the political spectrum have attested to this fact. The late Senators Barry Goldwater, a conservative, and William J. Fulbright, a liberal, attested to this control in their public statements. So did Senator Ernst Hollingsworth of North Carolina, before his retirement. The “gas chamber” hoax is routinely used to suggest that any criticism of Jewish power in the United States is a prelude to a new Holocaust. Remember, Jews are innocent by definition – and thus Palestinian Arabs robbed of their homeland are terrorists who hate Jews for no reason. This dictum of political correctness is so firmly enshrined that even reputable academics, such as professors Walt and Mearsheimer, cannot get a fair hearing for their vies. An ex-president of the United States, Jimmy Carter, just barely gets a hearing for his criticisms of Israeli intransigence. The people who run a country are the people who cannot be criticized. By this measure, not to mention their enormous political and economic power, Jews are the de facto rulers of these United States. But are they wise rulers? Are they benevolent rulers? History suggests otherwise. When Jews were the tax collectors and finance ministers in medieval Poland and Spain, they mercilessly ground down the common people with extortionate tax farming. When Jewish Bolsheviks seized power in Russia, they “liberated” ordinary Russians and Ukrainians into murderous gulags and construction projects. When Jews took Palestine from the Arabs, they kicked 700,000 Arabs into the desert to starve. Jews in the United States cannot murder and dispossess – yet. But they can destroy the livelihoods of those who speak against them and they do. Jewish power is not benevolent – it is deadly dangerous and detrimental to the best interests of the non-Jewish white majority. Jewish power is being used to transform the United States into a Third World Brazil. All efforts to transform the “whites only” immigration laws of the United States have been made by Jews. All laws to restrict opposition to this process – like “hate speech” laws – are being promoted by Jews.

America is in the grip of a kosher dictatorship. This dictatorship knows what it is doing. Its power – and its designs – are becoming ever more visible to more and more Americans. That is why criticism and exposure of its designs must be prevented at all costs. And that is why, fellow citizens, you speak out against Jews at the peril of your livelihood and career.

Hey Ronnie Schmuck Scum:

There are lots of free porno sites on the web. Could you please suck yourself off somewhere else?

Ronnie Schmuck Scum:

I realise that I am miles ahead of you but, believe me, it is not much of an achievment. Could you please try some facts and reasoned arguments so that I can plaster you once again? Maybe you could persuade anus brain Welch to rebut my “Lecturer of Truth” essay.

See! Other people post on this thread. I’m not just talking to myself. Ronnie wants anus brain Welch to rebut an article he wrote! I told you so.

Now get out of here Ronnie so that I can be by myself. This is my spot to suck myself off. I found it fair and square. I don’t want anyone else around while I do it so you need to go.

Once I manage to evict everyone from this thread I’ll finally be able to convince the world that I’m not a mindless Jew hater, that the holocaust never happened, that Transjordan doesn’t have an outlet to the sea, that all the missing jews are hiding behind the Ural mountains, that the Germans were super meticulous in their record keeping and all the documents that prove German innocence of endlosung der judenfrage through genocide are being kept in secret vaults by communist Jews.

I think it was Plato that once said, “The mark of a true genius is ability to argue with yourself on 2 year old blog posts that no one reads. I stand by that statement. I live my life by it.

Ronnie Schmuck:

I’m very impressed by your last post. Despite your obvious error on the location of the port of Acquaba, you actually got it right. (And despite your obvious error, if you watch “Lawrence of Arabia”, Ronnie, you will discover that the port is actually located on the north African coast on the Mediterranean, where Lean actually fimed it. There was no cavalry charge either, Ronnie. In actual fact, the Turks surrendered rather than be slaughtered. We need to always get the details right, Ronnie.)

Congratulations, Ronnie. You are learning at long last. Now go get your Ph.d. in Tic-Tac-Toe.

John – these idiots are too easy.

I saw the tactic that they tried back in the Santomauro thread…masquerading as you and I.

You asshats ceratinly weren’t “chosen” for your erudition; you all mumble like Samboes. John Thames has handed you nitwits your puckered assholes at every turn.

You fucktards are crowing that Tobin got thrown in jail? He can’t use truth as a defense…what other outcome could he expect?

I’ll explain for the slow in the room that the next posting bearing my name will be by one of the Metzizah Boys. They do love that bloody baby cock, after all.

Tobin has more balls that you choda-garglers combined.

Since it’s just you and me in the room, Han I think you better watch who you’re calling slow. Now get the hell out. This is my abandoned blog and I don’t need anyone who uses stolen SUBLIMINAL Ouija boards to worship the true gods such as Odin crapping on my virtual rugs.

Ronnie,

This is getting boring. You’re not fooling anyone. Han is not that stupid, and no one believes that you are me. Give it up and go blow yourself on some other blog.

HOLOCAUST BOOK KEEPING

Everyone is familiar with the fraudulent accounting practices of Enron and World.com. They doctored the figures and bankrupted thousands of trusting investors. But the swindlers of Enron and World.com had their predecessors. These were the Jews who doctored casualty totals for Jews killed on the Eastern front. These Jews manipulated the Einsatzgruppen reports in Berlin by inserting exaggerated kill totals into the reports or by inventing certain reports outright. This fraudulent accounting has never been called to account.

It is time to emphasize a key point. The Germans were fighting a war in Soviet Russia against the Red Army; they were not looking around for Jews to exterminate. Fighting a war against an opponent enjoying overwhelming numerical and material superiority requires the devotion of every available resource to that objective; it leaves no time for pursuing a Jewish extermination policy simultaneously. The German Einsatzgruppen reports in Berlin are a heavily doctored fraud. What is required are the conveniently missing Einsatzgruppen reports of the German troops to their commanders in the field. These are the reports that would give, more or less, the real kill totals of the Jews executed in Russia. The Enron accountants of the Einsatzgruppen are operating with phony figures. These Holocaust book keepers of double entry death totals also ignore major gaps in their data. It is a known fact that the Soviets succeeded in evacuating over one-half of their Jewish population in the western territories ahead of the German advance. These Jews, never being under German control, could hardly have been killed by the Nazis.

Anyone acquainted with the vastness of Russia, its impenetrable forests, its limitless places for Jews to hide, the difficulty of travel, especially in winter, the extremely limited numbers of men in the German security forces totaling only three thousand, must know that the claimed kill totals of the Einsatzgruppen are fabulous beyond belief. There is an additional problem. The war time diaries of Heinrich Himmler, the German secret police chief, have been in Israeli hands since the end of the Second World War. The Israelis have not released them to this day. This clearly indicates something in the diaries inconsistent with the claimed exterminations. Himmler was in charge of all German security operations in Russia. He would surely know how many Jews were being killed and on whose authority. No single document could shed more light on what was actually going on. The fact that this key document is being suppressed does not inspire confidence in the Holocaust-by-bullets story.

The very best proof that Holocaust book keeping is fraudulent is the gas chamber hoax itself. One need not invent a fake extermination story if one has evidence of a real extermination. If the number of Jews shot by the Germans in Russia was sufficient to constitute an extermination program, then the Jews would have used that fact and not bothered with the phony “gas chambers”. Thus, the claimed number of shootings fails the test of simple logic. The Enron accountants of the Einzatsgruppen are playing with phony figures. They know it – and that is why the real documents are still a deeply buried, dark secret.

Ronnie:

Since no one else is watching this blog until Hanover just joined, why are you watching it? Are you that impressed by my wisdom or is your shit-for-brain bothering you? Try some historical Pepto-Bismol.

ARE JEWS TO BLAME FOR AUSCHWITZ?

The distinguished English historian, David Irving, was once asked by a Jew: “Are you saying that we are to blame for Auschwitz?” Irving responded: “If you want the short answer the sort answer is yes.” Of course, Irving qualified the answer by saying that was skipping from A-Z. But he was right. Jewish behavior landed Jews in Auschwitz. Jews will scream that this is “blaming the victim”. But who victimized whom? The Jews victimized a lot of people after the First World War. They victimized the Germans by buying up German real estate and businesses during the post-war inflation. The Germans lost everything; foreign Jews moved in and cleaned up. Terrible Communist upheavals shook Germany and Hungary after the war. In every case, the Jews were the revolutionaries. The people of Russia were victimized by the most brutal mass murder machine the world has ever seen. Again, the Jews did it. The Arabs of Palestine had a Jewish state imposed on them in the form of a declaration by the British Empire.

The Jews never consider these unpleasant facts in asking: “Why us? Therefore, David Irving is absolutely right. Jews are to blame for Auschwitz.

WENDELL WILKIE STYLE LIBERTARINISM

Libertarians are gutless wonders. The latest example is Rand Paul, currently running for the Republican Senatorial nomination in Kentucky. Paul says that he is against repealing the Civil Rights Act of 1964. That sounds like his father who once praised Martin Luther King, Jr. as a “great man”. Libertarians are going to save the country by getting the government off everyone’s backs but heaven forbid keeping the country white. Just abolish the government and La Raza Mexicans will sustain what whites created. This is the libertarian spiel. To a libertarian government is the only evil. Fiscal conservatism is everything; racial conservatism is nothing. A libertarian will quote the founding fathers ad infinitum on the evils of government. But the same libertarian would never quote the founding fathers on the superiority of the white race and the evils of race mixing hat aspect of the American tradition they ignore.

Was it not Thomas Jefferson who wrote that blacks and whites, being free, could not live under the same government? Was it not Abraham Lincoln who dreamed of the repatriation of blacks to Africa? Did not John C. Calhoun oppose the annexation of Mexico because it would put the inferior brown race on an equal footing with the superior white race? Did not the Army War College in the 1920’s preach racial superiority doctrines? Did not all states of the Union have laws against miscegenation until the Supreme Court overturned them in 1967? The answer to all these questions is in the affirmative. Yet libertarians dodge the racial angle the same way they dodge the Jewish angle. Never blame the state of Israel for turning Moslems against the U.S. Never suggest that U.S. aid to Israel be cut off. Never mention Jewish Commissars. Just murmur about a more “even handed” Mid East policy.

Libertarians are mush. When it comes to the preservation of these United States as a white country and breaking the stranglehold of Jewry, libertarians are Wendell Wilkie style “me too’ers”. They will change nothing.

THE TWIN FLAGS OF TREASON

International Jewry has two flags – the hammer and sickle of Soviet Communism and the blue and white hexagram of Zionism. Both are flags of treason to every gentile nation. Before 1945, the hammer and sickle of Communism was the preferred symbol of the Jews in every land. There was no Jewish state yet but the land of the Jewish commissars was the preferred substitute. Jews everywhere sang the praises of the land where there was no anti-Semitism. Yiddish literature burst with praise of socialism and the international. Stalin was the leader of the revolution and the Jews were his emissaries to the world. Virtually every Soviet ambassador and diplomat in the ‘20’s and ‘30’s was a Jew.

The creation of the state of Israel in 1948 and the Stalinist purges of the Jews beginning in 1950 led to the retirement of the hammer and sickle and the rise of the blue and white star. Now Jews praised praised the resurrected Jewish state. No longer did Birobidzhan in the Soviet Far east beckon as the new Promised Land. Jews in America demanded tribute for the new state the same way they once demanded the overthrow of capitalism on the streets of New York. Israel was the miracle in the desert the same way the U.S.S.R. was once the land of “fat calves and well fed babies”. The Jews were never able to convince average Americans that Soviet Russia was the ultimate American ideal. They only sold that to the liberal limousine intellectuals. But they have been able to convince the average American that Israel is conservatism in the desert. Jewish Communism in Palestine is the return of the Jews promised in the “Holy Bible”. That is a con job that all the apologists for Ukrainian famine in the 1930’s could never pull off.

The two flags of Jewry, the hammer and sickle and the blue and white of Zionism, are the proof that the average American has not caught on and probably never will. The American spits on the hammer and sickle while worshipping the blue and white star. He does not understand that the two flags represent the same dual objectives of the Chosen People – the destruction of all non-Jewish nationality and the subjection of the world to the recreated Temple. The two objectives are one and the same – for the one is meaningless without the other.

ASK THEM WHY

The Jews are coming out of the closet. Once they exercised their power behind the scenes; now they display it more and more openly. One good indicator of this is the amazing number of Jews who now sit in the Congress and Senate. Once they were limited to New York and the east coast states, now they are everywhere. California is a veritable hornet’s nest of them. The two long time Senators, Dianne Feinstein and Barbara Boxer, Jane Harmon, Howard Berman, Tom Lantos and others sit in the House. Al Franken, a comic and a clown, represents Minnesota. Chuck Schumer and Nina Lowy represent New York. Jewish politicians, like Rahm Emmanuel from Illinois, are literally crawling out of the woodwork. There has not been such a proliferation of Jews in politics since FDR’s “New Deal”. These creatures are not harmless. They represent Israel’s interests, not America’s interests. A perfect example is Joe “Nuke Iran” Lieberman from Connecticut.

One wonders what possesses the American people to vote for these sons and daughters of Zion. Can they not see what these Jews are and whose interests they represent? The days when Jews had to elect gentile fronts like Claude Pepper from Florida, Robert Wagner from New York and Guy Gillete from Iowa are pretty much over. Now they elect themselves and wave the flag of Israel while standing before the flag of the United States. Their arrogance is appalling. They pretend that the interests of Israel and the United States are one and the same. Anyone who says otherwise is a “bigot” and out-of-bounds. They even try to restrict the freedom of an ex-president of the United States, Jimmy Carter, to question Israel’s unconscionable policies. They assert, over and over again, that Iran has a nuclear weapons development program which supposedly poses a “threat” (to whom?). They provide no evidence for the assertion and no one asks them for any. No one asks where the United States shall get the money to attack Iran or how we can afford war against Iran when we cannot afford two wars in Iraq and Afghanistan now. No one explains why the average American should have to pay $15 for a gallon of gasoline to ensure Israel’s security.

People who are elected to the Senate and the House are elected to represent America’s interests. Yet these Jews seem more determined to get America into another war she cannot afford to promote Israel’s interests. It is high time to ask them why.

THE UNIFORM IN THE HISTORICAL CLOSET

The Jewish commissars. Were they fact or fiction? Received wisdom denied their existence for decades. Now official scholarship grudgingly admits their existence while denying their significance. Jewish commissars are not ideologically neutral. To admit their one time prominence is to admit that Adolf Hitler had a case. Admitting that Jews once ruled Soviet Russia is like admitting that Palestine once belonged to the Arabs. It puts the shoe on the wrong foot, so to speak. To speak of Jewish commissars is to implicitly speak of an alternative, and unacceptable, view of history. The acceptable view of history is that the Jew is always good, always innocent. The Jewish commissar is proof that the Jew is not always innocent. He represents a problem. The Jewish commissar and his bloodletting are such an image problem that the preferred technique has always been to pretend that he never existed.

Since the Jewish commissar is now an undeniable fact the politically correct approach is to relegate him to the footnotes in rare reference works. He is never to be mentioned publicly nor given the starring role in a History Channel production. He now has a place in the historical closet but shall remain there. He will never be dragged out in full regalia for public viewing, ever again.

Okay…conjure up Robert DeNiro in Cape Fear, doing the laugh…”

Ah. hahahahahahahaha…ahhhhhhahahahahahaha!”

Here is your clumsy attempt to OBFUSCATE the truth…

This idiot drones on and on.

This reminds me of the definition of INSANITY – do the same thing over and over again, yet expecting a different result.

Do you think that you’ll keep repeated your retarded mantras until you’ve lulled us into some hypnotic state, and we’ll all come around to your way of (non)thinking?

NOT

GONNA

HAPPEN

Jew Hater…Anti-Semite…it’s like debating a retarded Max headroom, who just recites the same crap over and over.

Your hockey helmet must be the consistency of foot-thick sheet rock, dumbass

JEWS ARE IN MY CLOSET

The other day on a hunch I took a brief survey of my living room and found no less then 13 Jews hiding under my sofa. I don’t know how to explain it but I see Jews everywhere these days. When I first got the place you rarely saw a Jew in the cupboard, or the foyer, but now the place is crawling with them. Jews under the floorboards, Jews in my linens, Jews in my rec room. America needs to wake up and realize that Jews are everywhere. I swear to God there were 14 of them in the spare tire well of my Honda.

One must wonder why they are there. Certainly they are up to some nefarious undertaking. There’s really no good reason why there should be any Jews in a laundry chute let alone 34 of them. I just can’t figure out what the master plan is. What does my laundry, my stack of vintage porn, and my spare tire have to do with world domination? I’m not sure, but I know I don’t need much more evidence then the 75 Jews buried under 2 feet of concrete in my basement to know that Hitler just might have been on to something.

Ha ahaaahhaah

What did I tell you idiots? The next posting bearing my name will be by one of the Metzizah Boys! How’s that baby cock taste through your hockey helmet you big nosed mendicant?

Dear Dumb Asses:

You have not rebutted a single point Han and I have made. You cannot.

And, oh yes, dumb ass ronnie schmuck. I explained exactly where the Jews hid out and where they went and its not only my living room and Honda, you lying piece of shit. Do you really imagie that our good readers cannot see the words in front of their eyes?

Hanover, it is idle to debate with professional liars, which is what they are. A website that seriously pretends that 09/11 was not a “false flag op” cannot be taken seriously on any subject. Since profanity and insults are their only arguments, why don’t you try eating kosher shit?

John – these baby cock tasting, fifth columnist, sycophants, quislings and enablers of scumbaggery, mendicants are dullards with their puerile attempts to foment dissent betwixt and between you and I – it’s like trying not to see a fucking huge fat ass walk into an ice cream parlour.

Guess what? You’re long past the non-padded world – according to the underwear you’re packing…pun intended! When you play hide-and-seek at your daily NAMBLA meetings, do you just take off your clothes and cover your eyes, because no one could possibly tell who you are because you’re not wearing the same clothes you were when you began playing?

Stick to dribbling come shots from the sides of your stupid mouth.

Han don’t tell me to stick to dribbling come shotes from the sides of my mouth you stupid, ever lying cocksucker!

Maybe poor Ronnie can get a job with Jon Stewarr writing his comedy routines. Rick Sanchez will reccomend him for the job.

idk if rick sanchez would recommend him but rick sanchez got fired for being the biggest idiot in television news, a big category, not for insulting jon stewart or antisemitic comments

Everybody in the country (except you) knows he got fired for anti-Semitic comments.

ITS STARTING TO HURT

The Jews are holding an international Holocaust Denial Conference in Dublin. The idea is how to reach impressionable youth how to recognize the “techniques” of Denial and how to rebut them. Naturally, the ugly possibility that the Deniers might be right is not considered. It should be obvious on the face of it that the Jews are worried. Their traditional technique of simply ignoring Denial, wishing that it would go away, will no longer work. The material is all over the Internet and, in their minds; it is spreading like a cancer.

The idea, obviously, is that certain “techniques” are employed by Deniers, to allow them to distort and manipulate indisputable “facts”. Identify the techniques and you have, ipso facto, “proved” that Deniers are lying. That the “techniques” or, more precisely, the inconvenient questions raised and the facts not addressed might impeach the established version, is not to be considered. One may be sure that among the telltale signs of Denier “technique” are questioning the validity of the Nuremberg trial, asserting that but for the trial there would be no evidence of an extermination program, claiming that the trial was run behind the scenes by Jews, arguing that no original documents were presented, that real documents were altered or forged to impeach the Germans, that the verdict was pre-determined to reach the desired conclusion, that exculpatory evidence was suppressed or destroyed and that the entire proceeding was a kangaroo court devoid of either factual or judicial validity. In addition, Deniers routinely assert that the defendants were tortured, that defendant testimony was intentionally false, designed to tell the court what it wanted to hear to gain individual acquittal, not to document the actual truth.

As a matter of fact, all these criticisms are true. But that is irrelevant. They are examples of Denier “technique” – and thus they convict the Denier of heresy on the basis of his own arguments. Deniers have other tell tale signs. They argue that there are no German records speaking of extermination, only evacuation and deportation. They claim that once war in Russia commenced, that deportation to the occupied territories became the “Final Solution”. Deniers argue that the alleged kill totals in Russia by the German security forces are grossly exaggerated and beyond the capacity of a real army fighting a real war. They claim that the Jewish deaths at Auschwitz were the result of typhus and disease, not “gassing”. The disposal rates of the crematory ovens are consistent with these deaths, not the millions of alleged victims. They point out that the captured German records, which show about 150,000 deaths at the camp, were carted off by the Red Army and not presented to the kangaroo Nuremberg court- a clear example of the legal irregularities that occurred there and clear grounds for a mistrial. The Deniers also emphasize that the Auschwitz camp complex was a major production center for the German war effort and that the Germans were making strenuous efforts to reduce the death rate in the camps to preserve their labor force. The Deniers, being clever fellows, point out that there was nothing secret about the Auschwitz complex of camps. They were located next to several Polish villages and Polish farmland came right up to the wire fences around the camps. Aerial reconnaissance photos taken by the U.S. Air Force in the summer and autumn of 1944 show no evidence of exterminations. The Deniers argue that there were several underground intelligence groups among the prisoners operating radio transmitters and carrier pigeons out of the camps. None of them reported any “gassings” or mass exterminations during the war to their governments-in-exile. Free Polish labor employed by the Germans at Auschwitz reported no “gassings” either.

These horribly logical people, the Holocaust Deniers, put great emphasis on several forensic studies of the so-called “gas chambers”. These studies uniformly find little, if any, trace of hydrogen cyanide residue in the chambers where million of Jews were supposedly being “gassed”. Internal records of the Auschwitz camp show that the supposed “gas chambers” were really underground morgues for storing diseased bodies before they could be cremated. The morgues were too small to handle the claimed number of victims. They had no proper heating or ventilation for gassing procedures. Neither were they properly secured or locked. The Germans did have railroad delousing cars and disinfestations chambers for clothing which could very easily have been converted to actual “gassing” operations had that been the intent. Actual Auschwitz buildings include theaters and orchestra for the inmates, as well as a hospital with a maternity ward for newly born Auschwitz inmates. These buildings, photographed and inspected by revisionists in the 1980’s, are now off limits to tourists. The revisionists point out that the alleged number of victims at Auschwitz has dropped from 4 million down to 1 million down to 800,000. Somehow the 6 million figure remains the same. The Deniers explain that most of the supposedly murdered Jews retreated into Russia ahead of the invading Wehrmacht. They quote official Soviet and Jewish sources to this effect. The Jews were greatly favored by the heavily Jewish Communist regime. These Jews hid out behind the Ural Mountains until the end of the war when they returned to western Russia and poured into Eastern Europe as the leading commissars of the new Communist regimes. The remaining Jews poured down through the Balkans to invade Arab Palestine or to migrate to America disguised as Poles, Hungarians, etc. when the United States dropped the classification “Jew” in November 1943. The Deniers do not dispute that perhaps one to two million Jews died or were killed from all causes during World War Two. They insist, however, that not all these deaths can be blamed on the Germans. Many Jews still living in Germany were killed by allied bombing raids. Many Jews died of overwork behind the Ural Mountains because of Joseph Stalin’s inhuman production requirements.

These are the arguments of Holocaust Deniers. There is no need to dispute their plausibility or to argue their factual support. To make the arguments is to wear the Mark of the Beast. 6-6-6 does not equal “six million”.

“I explained exactly where the Jews hid out and where they went and its not only my living room and Honda, you lying piece of shit. Do you really imagie that our good readers cannot see the words in front of their eyes?”

So they ARE in your LIVING ROOM and HONDA too? I have some in my PANTRY. We should call the EXTERMINATORS! Ha ha haaaaaahaha

I can believe those mendicants call us irrational Jew haters. What do they expect us to do when there’s Jews in our SHOWER and Jews in our UNDERWEAR DRAWER?

The Three Stooges just fired you for no comedy talent.

“The Jews are holding an international Holocaust Denial Conference in Dublin.”

The Task Force for International Cooperation on Holocaust Education, Remembrance, and Research, an organization of member states started by Swedish Prime Minister Göran Persson in 1998, is holding a conference on Antisemitism and Holocaust Denial in Dublin.

It’s a conference on antisemitism, which holocaust denial is a form of.

I’m not an Anti Semite, you lying cocksucker. When you can’t deal with the facts you resort to lying through your Jew lips. The facts are that I think Jews control the whole entire world, and that Hitler might have been on to something. If that’s Anti-Semitic then you can take your big Jew balls and stick them right in my mouth.

THE OVERLOOKED

People simply refuse to think when evaluating the supposed extermination of the Jews in Russia. One of the most striking features of the German deportation of the Jews to Russia is the constant shifting of Jews from one location to another. This fact is very difficult to reconcile with an extermination program. If one is exterminating Jews, there is absolutely no reason for such relocation and reassignment. One can shoot Jews just as easily at one location as at another. If, however, the real objective is to employ the deported Jews as labor, then the shifting of the labor from one location to another as war time production needs shift makes perfect sense. There is a second reason for this constant relocation – and that is to protect the captive labor supply from the front and the advance of the enemy army. The Auschwitz camp was constantly shipping Jews further east. That would hardly have been necessary if Auschwitz were really the extermination camp it was claimed to be.

The proponents of the Jewish extermination myth do not bother to explain this constant shifting of a captive labor force. They rely, rather, on the assumption that no one will notice the obvious.

THE NEW HOLOCO$T

Since the Jews are such conniving bastards that they would invent something so heinous as the holocaust I decided that what they really need is a new holocaust. We’ll model it just like the old holocaust (even though it didn’t happen).

I was crunching some numbers though and I decided that in the new holocaust going around from Jew to Jew and shooting them just doesn’t make much sense. First of all, bullets are just way too expensive. With the wars going on and ammunition scarce .45 is running around 50 cents a round and 9mm and .38 aren’t much cheaper. We could reload and save some money, but my Jewish problem solvers out in the field would have to collect all their brass and ship it back. It’s just a headache.

I was thinking too, how long does it take someone to dig a grave at gunpoint? I mean, we can’t just leave the dead bodies laying around everywhere to stink up our white nation. It’s really going to dig into our bottom line if we have to wait around half a day for the Jews in a town to dig a hole big enough for them all to fit in. And then after? We have to fill in that fucker ourselves. That just sucks.

And then we’d have to deal with those hippy assholes who think that killing Jews is wrong or some similar bullshit. We don’t really want to have to shoot a whole bunch of white folk no matter how ignorant they are of how important it is that we kill all the Jews. I’m sure they’d try to shoot at us if they saw us shooting Jews out in the open. It would turn into a bloody civil war and by the time we explained to those hippies that killing Jews is the right thing to do I’m sure a whole bunch of Jews would end up hiding behind the Canadian border just like last time.

But then the answer came to me!

The other day, I was listening to the radio and I heard a CSX train commercial. Did you know those trains can ship a ton of freight 468 miles on a gallon of diesel? Holy crap what a savings over the amount of money I’m dumping on fuel just to send my problem solvers around from synagogue to synagogue to spray paint a swastika and plant burning crosses. If I could just get those pesky Jews to one central place I could solve all those other problems pretty easily and if that’s the case, CSX train is the way to do it.

With everything centralized we could capitalize on the inventiveness of superior white folk like Henry Ford. That guy would have known how to kill a Jew. He wouldn’t have messed around with any onesie twosie bullshit. He’d figure out a way to kill hundreds at a time and make them all disappear in just a few short hours. I’m thinking of maybe using a pesticide (hahahaha because they are pests – get it?) but I haven’t figured out the logistics yet. Maybe I’ll call execution expert Fred Leuchter for some advice.

Why don’t ewe just dispose of them Midwest famine style, genius?

I’M NOT CONTRADICTING MYSELF

After the good deal of thought that went into that last piece I realized why the Einsatzgruppen stopped shooting Jews. Clearly they all realized that shooting Jews and burying them in mass graves was bad, and that the war effort would have been better served by shipping Jews by freight all over Europe. The policy shift is not contradictory at all. They hoped, I’m sure, that by shipping them all over the place they would all get hopelessly lost and not able to find their way back home.

Shipping Jews across Europe had nothing to do with making the murderous task of the Einsatzgruppen more efficient. It had everything to do with Hitler’s affinity for children’s stories. The final solution was a tribute to Hitler’s favorite German fairy tale, Hansel and Gretel. If Hitler could get the Jews truly lost, perhaps they would stumble on house made of candy and get eaten by a witch.

THEY JUST DIDN’T KNOW

Jews have the habit, whenever their evil is pointed out to them, of claiming that all of them should not be blamed for the malfeasances of the few. It is the “few bad apples” argument. Unfortunately, this apologia ignores the legal doctrine of “willful blindness”. If Jews are not “all in it together” then why do they ignore/subsidize the evil their fellows do? Let us take the state of Israel as an example. Jews in America know full well the evil their fellow Jews in the Zionist state do. Yet with full knowledge of the evil, they support it no matter what it does. Every day the Israelis murder, maim and dynamite houses. They kidnap relief ships, with or without U.S. Congresswomen like Cynthia McKinney, launch brutal invasions of areas like Gaza and Lebanon, kill and maim thousands on the flimsiest of pretexts. And what do their fellow Jews in the U.S. do? Why, they keep the money flowing, of course. No slightest suggestion that U.S. aid to Israel should be cut off until the kike-Reich learns to behave is tolerated.

Many other examples could be cited. Jews pretend to be for free speech while simultaneously demanding laws for prosecuting “Holocaust Denial”. Occasional Jewish critics emerge, like Noam Chomsky, but the bulk of Jewry remains indifferent. Jews in the ‘20’s through ‘40’s cheered the Soviet Union and its murderous gulags. They had nothing bad to say about it until Stalin turned against the Jews in the late 1940’s. Jews even vituperate against other Jewish dissidents. George Soros was bitterly resented when he stated that the behavior of Israel was creating “rational anti-Semitism”. Alan Dershowitz hounds Norman Finkelstein at every opportunity. Jewish pressure resulted in Finkelstein being denied tenure at DePaul University. Jews claim to be in favor of “civil rights” but have no difficulty silencing or destroying the careers of those who oppose them. They black listed best-selling historian David Irving for joining the ranks of the Holocaust Deniers. They pressured U.S. prison authorities into refusing to do business with Fred Leuchter after his pioneering report on the non-existent “gas chambers” of Auschwitz. Rick Sanchez, Oliver Stone, Helen Thomas and Mel Gibson, among others, know only too well how Jews support freedom of expression when they are the ones being criticized.
Jews turn a blind eye to the evil their fellows do because Jews are all in it together. They take no effective action against Jewish evil because Jewish group interests trump any consideration of justice to non-Jews. And any Jew who pretends otherwise is a liar.

I’ve just discovered “Springtime for Hitler” humor as a substitute for the brain I don’t have.

Isn’t it ironic that I’m so much funnier now that my material is written by Jews?

Mel Brooks has a little talent; you have none.

Is your real name “Blazing Shit-For-Brain”?

This is great – I see the faux John Thames has nothing to offer, but the faux Ronnie Schmuck seems to have improved.

The Holocau$t is an absolute and complete falsehood. Hitler was not the huge scumbag you tools have portrayed him to be – there are others who were so much worse.

At any rate, “Blazing Shit-For-Brain”…you should go back to sucking bloody baby penis; this isn’t a good fit for you.

Fung…what took you so long, c0ck-smoker?

Where were you eating a hot lunch from john thames’ bung?

You’ve nothing to offer here but sophistry.

Let’s see if I can churn the crap in your colon once again:

You’re funny…just about as funny with a load of ronnie schmuck but-nuggets in your mouth. These baby cock tasting, fifth columnist, sycophants, quislings and enablers of scumbaggery, mendicants are dullards.

Han,

Some of us here are smart enough to figure out how to keep our screen names from being hijacked.

It doesn’t look like the same can be said for the master race. Weird huh? I guess the internet is just another tool of the evil joos; designed to make poor folks like you look stupid.

Not that you need any help.

Han,

Stop being such a blazing shit-for-brain. You bring the whole Aryan nation average I.Q. down 20 points every time you post. Seriously, you’re not helping the cause.

Ronnie, stop pretending to be fangbeer pretending to be me and Han. I found this 2 year old blog post fair and square. All you other assholes need to get the hell out so that I can go back to talking to myself.

EGG ON MY FACE?

The goddamned Jews egged my trailer again this year. I caught the little Mossad agents on my tree mounted game camera. One was covered in blue body paint and had a tail. The other had on some sort of robot body armor. It had to have been retaliation for my brilliant post on an internet site that no one reads. Who else could it have been but Jews? After all, they couldn’t possibly have dealt with the facts on that post that no one read. They had to resort to egging my single wide.

Just to confirm I had Fred Leuchter saws-all a few sections of siding off my trailer and send it to a lab. For damn sure it came back loaded with Jew cooties. And don’t tell me that every Jew doesn’t dress up in blue body paint and robot armor. That’s just willful blindness. If one Jew does it, you can bet for damned sure they all do. Hitler was definitely on to something.

Mr. Mozarella Meatball Head is back.
Just as stupid as he ever was.

Since meatball head isn’t too bright – the faux Ronnie Schmuck is John Thames. Spaghetti brain.

THEY’RE AT IT AGAIN!

Once again Americans have been given a graphic demonstration of who runs America after Juan Williams has been fired from his job by the Zionist run media for daring to criticize the enemy of Zionism.

On Oct. 21st, Juan was fired from NPR, a rabidly zionist media outlet, by Vivian Shiller, a bearded communist with a degree from Cornell university in Soviet studies. Juan was victimized for the very patriotic opinion that trick-or-treaters dressed as Muslims can be scary when they are located in the fuselage of a passenger airliner. For that his years of service to NPR were tossed away. He was immediately branded as anti-Muslim by Zionist Jews who wanted him made an example of. His credibility was trampled. His fame and fortune left in shambles. All at the behest of the Zionist media.

How many more pro-Zionist activists need to be fired before the world realizes that the Jews will stoop to any level (even firing people who appear to agree with them) to maintain their grip on world domination?

That’s right you puerile mendicants. Your REVERSE PSYOPS FALSE FLAG celebrity firings are OBVIOUS SUBLIMINAL attempts at scumbaggery.

And I know that’s you Fungbore, your Jew face betrayed you.

Ha ha asshole. You finally got caught pretending to make me look stupid. Now people will know it’s not just me that looks dumb.

TRICKY DICK OR ALGER NIXON

Richard Nixon made his name in politics by going after Alger Hiss, the now proven guilty Communist spy. However, twenty years later Nixon went to China and laid the foundations of the present day Chinese economic colossus that is devouring the U.S. One wonders why Nixon worried so much about the damage that a servant of Joseph Stalin was doing behind the scenes when he, Nixon, did so much more lasting damage by accommodating the Communists in public. Was Tricky Dick the Alger Nixon of counterfeit patriotism?

THE ROMANCE CONTINUES

Zionism is now the darling of the Judaized conservatives. Again and again, we hear how Israel is the “only democracy in the Middle East”. Yet this so-called “democracy” gestated in the womb of pre-revolutionary Marxist Russia. Jewish Marxists like Dov Ber Borochov, Chaim Zhitlovsky and others dreamed of a synthesis of Zionism and Marxism that would plant a Jewish Marxist state in Palestine rather than in Russia. After the revolution, Jewish Marxist agricultural colonies in the Crimea saw a steady stream of Marxist Jews moving back and forth from south Russia to Palestine via the Black Sea through Turkey. The intelligence agencies of the British mandatory authorities in Palestine watched this traffic very carefully. The first attorney general of Palestine, Norman Bentwich, asserted that the Communist regime in Russia and the Zionist regime in Palestine shared the same socialist ideals.

Today, this Marxist background of Zionism has been all but forgotten. Zionism has been taken over by right wing Jabotinsky revisionists, who espouse free market economics. These Zionists have conned American conservatives into believing that a similar economic philosophy makes Zionism an “American” philosophy. Nothing could be further from the truth. America was never an attempt to create a “new ghetto”. America was never based on the premise that Americans, the Irish and the Germans are inherently incompatible and should be segregated from each other. America was never created by Marxists with a hatred of individual enterprise. Zionism emerged from the revolutionary turmoil of Czarist ghettos with one objective – recreate the ancient temple and drive the Arabs into the desert. Zionism was rejected by the Jewish commissars because it wanted loyalty to Marx in Palestine – not loyalty to Marx in Mother Russia.

American conservatives know about as much about the real history of Zionism as American liberals knew about the reality of Stalin’s Russia in the “Red Decade” of the 1930’s. They have sold out to the Zionist state the same way the limousine liberals sold out to the romance of Bolshevism.

DANNY BOY ABRAMS ON SEX SUPERIORITY

Dan Abrams, the legal analyst of NBC, is writing a book called “Man Down, How Women Are Better At…” One can just imagine the reaction were Dan Abrams to write a book entitled Blacks Down, How Whites Are Better At…” The reaction would be instantaneous. The book would be labeled racist, vile and untrue by definition. The facts on white superiority would count for nothing. One cannot believe that whites are superior to blacks but one can believe that women are superior to men. We may be sure that Dan Abrams does not discuss Alcohol Prohibition in his paean of praise to female superiority. The fact that women were the driving force behind the most disastrous social reform movement in American history might present difficulties for Mr. Abrams contrived thesis. Thus, we may be sure that he deletes it. Dan Abrams shall also be predictably silent on how women are treated in his real country called Israel. Thus, “Danny Boy” shall not be describing how women in Israeli busses are required to ride in the rear as the bus passes through Orthodox neighborhoods. Nor shall he discuss the vast Jewish controlled sex slave trade and the thousands of women kidnapped to the Tel Aviv brothels each year. “Danny Boy” may mention Israel’s 1953 law granting women full civic, political and economic rights. But, if so, he shall surely delete the exception for family law and what it entails. Thus, “Danny Boy” shall not mention that a wife cannot get a divorce without her husband’s consent or that a wife whose husband dies while she is still childless must offer herself in marriage to his bother – or buy her release through forfeiture of the community property. Still less shall he mention that if a woman has a child born from adultery the child shall be termed a mamzerim, a bastard, and shall be forbidden to marry, except to another bastard. A woman whose husband goes missing in war or who otherwise disappears cannot remarry unless she has absolute proof of his death. Abortion, in Israel, is a state decision, not a personal decision. A Jewess must obtain government permission for an abortion. The decision shall be made based on the state’s need for more Jewish babies and the danger of a higher Arab birth rate, counterbalanced by the woman’s financial ability to care for the child. Traditionally, in Israel, a woman’s testimony has no standing in family law court. In the Orthodox synagogues until recently a woman cannot qualify for the minyam, the minimum number of Jews necessary to form a quorum. Only male Jews so qualify. The free love, no-fault divorce system that has caused so much grief in the United States is virtually unknown in Israel. Divorce has been severely restricted in the Zionist state. When divorce does occur, it is exclusively under the control of the religious authorities, not the civil authorities. There is no civil divorce in Israel.

“Danny Boy” Abrams knows these facts on his real country perfectly. But like the deceased Jewish Communist Ashley Montagu/Israel Ehrenberg who wrote “The Natural Superiority of Women” back in the 1960’s, he is not about to mention them as he lies through his teeth.

CALIGULA WOULD SMILE

In today’s political mindset the entry of women into the work world and the realm of politics is supposed to be a good thing. It is an alleged sign of “progress”. Yet as the late Englishman, John Bagot Glubb sagely noted in his works, history teaches a different lesson. Historically, the rise of feminism in all historical epochs has been a sign of decay and decline, never a sign of progress. This was true in the late history of the Roman Empire, in the periods of decline of Islam and today, in the racial and economic decline of white America and the Christian cradle of western civilization, Europe. In all of these epochs, feminism was the immediate precursor to social collapse, anarchy and the invasion and decimation of the formerly dominant populations by racial aliens.

In every case where once powerful empires ruled the world, the process of dissolution was marked in its final years by the intrusion of women into areas formerly reserved exclusively for men. This was true of the Romans, of whom Cicero said: “We Romans, who rule the world, are ruled by our women.” The late empire, overrun by barbarians as the United States are overrun by Mexicans now, featured many women dabbling in politics and running for minor offices. These women, like modern feminists, regarded large families as an inconvenience. They practiced abortion and left unwanted children to die on the rocks. Many old Roman patrician families died out because of sterility. The marriage law promoted by Octavia, Augustus Caesar, was a belated attempt to reverse this process which was already well advanced in the first century A.D. Roman feminists were slightly less ridiculous than than American warrior women. They did not fight and die in the legions, unlike American women who confuse fanny patting court martials with bayonet thrusts. In modern day America, women behave much like their Roman forebears practicing abortion, small families and creating social chaos in the military and the job market. Complementing the nonsense of women abandoning their proper biological roles of mother and homemakers are the same trends of racial invasion (now called “diversity”) and economic collapse. The native whites are no longer reproducing while Third Worlders proliferate across the land. Mad emperors have been replaced by mad media liars but otherwise the trends, demographic, political and economic, are very much the same. The American Empire engages in wars it cannot afford while idiotic females cow the politicians back home. It is the same degeneracy producing the same results.

Sir John Bagot Glubb was, of course, the famed Glubb Pasha who commanded the Arab Legion of Jordan so successfully in the 1948 war. As a life-long servant of the once dominant British Empire, Glubb was perhaps qualified, in more senses than one, to comment and write on the process of imperial decline. He spent thirty plus years in the Middle East observing the consequences of Britain’s pledge by Lord Balfour to the Zionist Jews. His vast acumen on historical decline was fueled both by wide reading and actual experience in the field. Glubb was, of course, completely correct, on the historical consequences of allowing women to intrude where they do not belong. The historical record is completely on his side – a fact unnoticed by silly females indoctrinated by “women’s study” courses in college.

Thus, we live in an age where the Alcohol Prohibition sex gets its way on everything. The same silly shit-for-brains who once made millions for organized crime by banning the demon rum now put creatures like Hillary Clinton in the State Department. This woman, who embarrasses the nation every time she opens her mouth, now speaks to the world for the empire that can no longer pay its bills. Caligula would smile at the insanity.

THE BIRD THAT CHIRPS IN HEBREW

We hear constantly of the difference between a “neo-conservative” and a “paleo-conservative”. What is the difference? The difference is the difference between a real patriot and an Israel First, America Last fraud. An internet writer who goes by the name of Max Shpak offers a very useful analogy to illustrate the difference. Shpak refers to the well known phenomenon of a cuckoo bird invading a nest of chicks. The cuckoo imitates the chirping sounds of the birds. The chicks, in the imprinting stage, mistake the cuckoo for their mother. The cuckoo, thus disguised, manipulates and exploits the brainwashed birds. The neo-conservative, in reality an Israel First Jew, joins the conservative camp, chirping about high taxes and getting the government off the citizen’s backs. He drapes himself in conservative rhetoric and tells the human birds what they want to hear. The human birds, thus deluded, welcome the neo-conservative as one of their own. Then the cuckoo starts chirping about a “War on Terror” and the alleged threat of “Islamo-Fascism”. He forgets about reducing taxes and the size of government and instead tweets that the United States should spend trillions of dollars it does not have to fight wars in Iraq, Afghanistan and Iran. In short, he shows his real agenda, “Israel Uber Alles” under the cloak of false conservatism.

That is how to distinguish the “neo-conservative” cuckoo or one of its hirelings, like Glen Beck. To better emphasize the analogy with nature we must turn to an historical analogy. In the days of the British Mandate over Palestine there existed a man named Vladimir Jabotinsky. Jabotinsky is the unknown (to the gentiles) founding father of neo-conservatism. Vladimir Jabotinsky was the advocate of Revisionist Zionism, so-called because it refused to accept the partition of Jordan east of the river from the Palestinian Mandate. Jabotinsky wanted a Jewish state on both sides of the river. He abhorred the large number of Jews involved in Marxist socialism and was an enthusiastic advocate of free market economics. But he also opposed any compromise with the Arabs of Palestine, who he knew would never agree to the planting of a Jewish state in their land. To express his ideology, he wrote two famous essays, “The Iron Law” and “The Iron Wall (We and the Arabs)”. From the former essay he wrote words widely quoted by the students of Zionism. In essence, he stated that the Arabs of Palestine were not savages. They were highly civilized and would never agree to a Zionist state in their land until all hope was lost to them. Thus, the Arabs must be confronted with an “iron wall of bayonets”, to use Jabotinsky’s famous phrase, to coerce their surrender to the unavoidable. Jabotinsky openly admitted that “Zionism is a colonizing adventure and it stands or falls on the use of force”. He proclaimed: “It is important to speak Hebrew but it is more important to shoot.” This is the true origin of the philosophy of the “War on Terror”. It is the Jabotinsky philosophy of perpetual war with the Arabs to ensure the future security of the future state of Israel. Naturally, it would not do to tell Americans that they must fight and die for Israel’s survival. Therefore, a ruse must be concocted. The ruse is to tell Americans that there exists a menace called “Islamo-fascism”. America and Israel must jointly oppose this menace because it threatens both equally. As anyone can tell, this is precisely what has been done.

There are other methods by which Americans can distinguish the Zionist neo-conservative cuckoo from the real thing. Real conservatives are “isolationists”. That is, they do not believe in using America’s military might to police the world. But Zionist neo-conservatives insist that America must police the world – for Israel’s benefit. Zionist neo-conservatives are social liberals. They support open borders, diversity and the tearing down of America as a white country. They do this at the same time that they snarl for war against Iran for Israel’s benefit. Two outstanding examples of this mindset are Senator Charles Schumer of New York and Senator Joseph Lieberman of Connecticut. Zionist cuckoo birds shall hiss with barely concealed hatred of actual conservatives like Patrick Buchanan.

These, then, are the major differences between real conservatives and Zionist conservatives. But the simplest way to distinguish the real thing from the fake is to look for the bird with the hooked beak that chirps in Hebrew.

http://holyhoax.org/component/content/article/5813

http://michaelsantomauro.blogspot.com/2010/10/jews-killed-millions.html

Jewish Communist Killers.

THE JEWISH NATIONALITIES PROBLEM

These days no one wants to say a good word for Communism. Considering the utter failure of Communist economics and the murderous gulag system, that is undoubtedly a good thing. However, in one respect, Communism was superior to democracy. The Communists, from the moment that they took over from the former Czarist Empire, recognized the existence of various nationalities within the new Soviet system. Thus, there was the Ukrainian nation, the various Moslem and Turkish nations and, most important of all, the Jewish nation. Democracy, by contrast, pretends that there are no nations, just citizens with different skin colors. Thus, under democratic political superstitions, there are just Mexicans, not the rising nation of Atzlan. Joseph Stalin, the Soviet nationalities commissar before his rise to total power, would have sneered at such nonsense.

One particular aspect of Soviet nationalities policy was infinitely superior to democratic superstition. Soviet Russia, the land of unlimited opportunity for Jewish commissars, officially recognized the need for a territorial solution to the Jewish nationality problem. In part this approach stemmed from competition with the Zionist demand for a Jewish state in Palestine, in part it stemmed from the Communist desire to “normalize” the Jews by placing them on their own soil within the a socialist federation where Jews dominated the various commissariats. But at least the Communists recognized that the Jews were a nationality. This political realism forms a refreshing contrast to infantile Americans who persist in believing that Jews who manipulate their foreign policy in favor of Israel are really Americans. The pretense that what is good for Israel is good for America is not merely infantile nonsense; it is, more fundamentally, an effort to deny the Jewish “nationality problem” which the Soviet commissars so forthrightly faced.

The Soviet solution to Jewish nationality problems was, of course, the famous Birobidzhan project of the late 1920’s and 1930’s. Birobidzhan was to become the Jewish socialist paradise in the far east of Siberia, adjacent to Japanese occupied Manchukuo. A vast propaganda campaign inspired Depression decade American and Canadian Jews to emigrate to Birobidzhan. This campaign persuaded thousands of Jews to emigrate to Soviet Russia. Some of the leaders of the return to Russia were Sam Carr and Sam Gershon in Canada and Melech Epstein in the United States. Birobidzhan was the Jewish Palestine in Communist Russia before the state of Israel was created. Today, the state of Birobidzhan still exists although less than 50% of its population is Jewish. The lure of Birobidzhan on pre-World War Two Jewry has all but been forgotten. Most Jews prefer that it remain forgotten so as not to re-open for examination the once powerful hold of Communism on the Jewish mind. The fact that Jewish nationalism once operated openly within the context of an overwhelmingly Jewish Communist system is also food for thought. Current Zionist propaganda pretends that Jewish nationalism was once persecuted by Soviet Communism. But ‘twas not always so.

The Jewish nationalities problem of Soviet Russia holds important implications for Americans, as noted. Jews in America are acting as a nationality while posing as American citizens. Their political ideology is largely Marxist and devoted to loyalty to Israel, not loyalty to the United States. Democratic ideology prevents Americans from either understanding or acknowledging these facts. It is rather ironic that the Soviet nationalities approach to Jewry rather resembled that of the late Adolf Hitler, who also considered Jewry a nation, albeit an internationally dispersed one. Hitler opposed the Jewish nation while the Bolsheviks, themselves largely Jewish, supported the Jewish nation within the context of international socialism. This study of the Jewish nationalities problem is not a demand for political totalitarianism; it is a demand for political realism. Jewry is a nation despite the innumerable divisions within it and it can only be dealt with on that basis. That dictum refers not to the artificial state of Israel but to the Jewish nation at large, of which Israel is only the symbol and an insignificant part.

THE PROMISED LAND OF BIROBIDZHAN

Everyone these days thinks of Palestine/Israel as the “Promised Land”. But there once was a Promised Land in the Soviet Far East known as Birobidzhan. Birobidzhan was the Palestine of the Communist Jews. It was the brain child of the Soviet nationalities commissar, Joseph Stalin, in 1928. (This was the same Stalin who co-founded the Moscow State Yiddish Theater.) The Party created Birobidzhan as the Soviet alternative to Zionism. Too many Soviet Jews were Zionists as well as Communists. For these Jews to have a second loyalty to the Jewish state-in-the-making could prove dangerous. Accordingly, the year before the Wailing Wall riots in Palestine, the Party announced its plans for a Jewish “autonomous region” in far off Siberia.

A gigantic propaganda campaign was launched to persuade pro-Communist Jews in America and Canada (and there were thousands) to migrate to Birobidzhan. The Communist press sang the praises of the Jewish state-within-the-state. The Talmy’s and others began recruitment drives in major metropolitan centers for potential émigrés. There was much enthusiasm for Soviet Zion. The lure of Communism plus Jewish nationality was too much for many Jews in the Depression era to resist. And thus, the trek back to “Mother Russia” began. These Jews had heard much about the lack of anti-Semitism in Bolshevik Russia and the wonderful opportunities for advancement there. And it was true. The Soviet commissariats in the 1920’s and 1930’s overflowed with Jews. Birobidzhan became all the rage during the Red Decade. Zionism was less powerful than Communism among the Jewish masses in pre-World War Two days. By synthesizing Communism with a form of territorial Zionism within Russia, the Communists appealed to powerful emotions among the Jews. Enthusiasm for Birobidzhan began to dwindle in the late 1930’s with the onset of Stalin’s bloody purges. The harsh nature of life in Siberia also worked to dampen the enthusiasm of those who arrived there.

Birobidzhan, as an ideal among Communist Jews, finally began to fade in the post-World War Two era as the emerging Zionist state in Palestine became a looming reality. It became even less attractive when Joseph Stalin’s anti-Semitic purges began in the early 1950’s. And so Birobidzhan, the Soviet Zion, finally faded into insignificance. Birobidzhan still exists even though its once exclusively Jewish population is only a small percentage of the residents. It is hardly ever mentioned, for obvious reasons. It would be impossible to discuss Birobidzhan without discussing it as a lure to the Communist elements in Jewry in the west. Since the Jewish connection with Communism is heresy, such forgotten matters must stay buried. The story of Birobidzhan is, in a sense, the fulfillment of the pre-revolutionary disputes within Jewry. Chaim Zhitlovsky and Dov Ber Borochov engaged in acrimonious disputes with Lenin over whether Jewish nationality could be reconciled with Communism. Lenin said no, but he did not convince many of his ardent Jewish Marxist comrades-in-arms. Birobidzhan arose to placate the followers of Zhitlovsky and Borochov.

Birobidzhan is now a relic of history. But it is a relic of immense historical significance. It is a symbol of a forgotten historical connection. That connection has deep relevance even today, as the Jewish population in Israel originally came from the Marxist areas in Russia-Poland where the Marxist-Zionist antithesis was fought so fiercely. Many Jews in Israel today have never heard of Zhitlovsky or Borochov. But they retain a fondness for the Marxist socialism of the land from which they emigrated. Minsk and Pinsk are far from Tel Aviv, but the Pale of Settlement still lives in the New Ghetto.

THE FACE OF COMMUNISM

In all the current hoopla about women in politics, there is one very powerful woman in politics who is little remembered today. Her name was AnaRabisohn/ Pauker. She was the Jewish hyena who terrorized and murdered thousands of Romanians post-World War Two as one of Joseph Stalin’s most trusted henchmen. Born as the daughter of a rabbi, Ana married K.V. Pauker of the Soviet secret police. She worked in Romania as a syphilis infected prostitute before rising to total power with the Soviet occupation of Romania. She was hideously ugly as well as totally ruthless. Pauker lost the top half of her left ear because of her syphilis infection. She was one of the most murderous of the overwhelmingly Jewish apparatchiks who ruled in Eastern Europe after the war. Ana Pauker/Rabisohn was hated with a vengeance by the entire Romanian population. Even more than Jacob Berman in Poland or Matyas Rakosi in Hungary, she symbolized the alien terror of Communism.

Under Ana’s enlightened rule, thousands of Jews staffed the commissariats of Romania. The Romanians had virtually no say in the rule of their own land. She slew Romanians like a kosher butcher. She was the female Joseph Stalin. Ana Pauker, daughter of a rabbi, was the most hated woman in Europe. Had Ana Pauker/Rabisohn stood alone, she would have been an anomaly. But she was not. Her henchmen were all of the same tribe. Ana not merely served the Party; she served Zionism as well. She willingly allowed thousands of Communist Jews to migrate to Palestine after the war. Her Jewish sense of identity was inseparable from her loyalty to the Party. This brutal hyena of a Jewess symbolized to the entire Romanian nation the Jewishness of Communism.

It is worth recalling Ana Rabisohn Pauker for she was the prototype for the founding mother of feminism, Betty Friedan/Goldstein. Friedan, another Jewess who was just as Communist, and almost as hideously ugly as Ana, has been followed by similar alien creatures like Barbara Boxer, Dianne Feinstein and Gloria Allred. All these Red Jewesses essentially aspire to be Secretary of the Party, just like the daughter of the rabbi who achieved total power and total terror.

REVISIONIST FILM MAKING?

The English film maker, David Lean, made two masterpieces within four years, “Lawrence of Arabia” in 1961 and “Dr. Zhivago” in 1965. It seems to have occurred to no one to ask if there may have been a connection between the two movies. After all, what connection could there be between a movie about Arabia and a movie about Russia? But maybe there is a connection. Maybe David Lean, a historically literate Englishman working in a heavily Jewish industry, was trying to give a glimpse beneath the censorship at two of the seminal events of the twentieth century – the Bolshevik revolution and the betrayal of the Arabs. Now, as students of history know the Communist revolution in Russia was heavily Jewish. The betrayal of the Arabs was part and parcel of the betrayal of the Palestinians. Yet Lean makes no mention of Jews in “Dr. Zhivago” and no mention of the Balfour Declaration in “Lawrence of Arabia”. Why? As a literate Englishman he was surely aware of the deleted historical background.

These films came out in the early 1960’s. That would mean that potential viewers of the films who lived in the World War One days would have been 50-60 years old – old enough to remember Lord Balfour’s declaration to the Jews and the Jewish commissars. Would they have been perceptive enough to notice the deletions, to fill in the dots and to grasp the film’s subliminal message? It seems unlikely on the face of it that David Lean would just “happen” to make two films within four years of each other bearing on closely related themes all but unknown to the man-in-the-street. Did David Lean intend to tell as much as he could about the hidden history of the twentieth century? Was he leaving clues for those who could figure it out? Or did he choose his thematic material merely by coincidence and with the necessary “edits” to keep Sam Spiegel happy?

We will never know. Lean never said and now he is dead. But the viewer of “Lawrence of Arabia” and “Dr. Zhivago” who knows of the tie-in between the Jewish Bolsheviks and the Zionist-Bolsheviks in Palestine will always wonder whether David Lean was not winking knowingly behind the camera even while accepting the applause of the Hollywood Jews.

BURYING THE TRUTH

The late Adolf Hitler probably did more to cover up the truth about Communism than any man who ever lived. He converted a provable fact – the Jewish control behind communism – into a fiction of Nazi propaganda. Worse than that, he allowed the Jews to concoct a hoax of their own extermination, the six million legend, to cover-up the gulags of the Jewish commissars. Before Hitler gave the Jews the cover-up they needed, the Jewish Communist connection was common knowledge. Everyone from Winston Churchill to the American State department to the man-in-the-street knew that Communism and the Jews were one and the same.

But then Hitler had to come along and pull the curtain over the truth. “Hitler lied; therefore he lied about the Jews and Communism.” So goes the refrain. If you claim that Jews and Communism are synonymous, then you are mad – just like mad Adolf. An ocean of verifiable facts disappear behind the camouflage. It does no good to quote Jewish reference works that no one reads. Jews and Communism are a myth – because Hitler said so. No one can escape the equation – not even the otherwise renowned Alexander Solzhenitsyn. “Two Hundred Years Together” contains massive documentation on the power of the Jews in Soviet Russia during the 1920’s and 1930’s. That did not make Solzhenitsyn a prophet of truth in the pro-Zionist west; it made him a pariah of forgotten history. Solzhenitsyn did not quite qualify as a Nazi fruitcake; he was dismissed as a reactionary Russian instead. Jews and Communism have become a falsehood by innuendo phenomenon. The rebuttal consists not in disproving the facts since that is impossible. The technique is to link the unpopular truth with an unpopular historical figure.

Jews and Communism has always been an unpopular subject. It was unpopular among the peoples who lived under it; it was even more unpopular among intellectual cognoscenti who do not want to believe that the world’s most unpopular minority might not be quite the blameless victims of unreasoning prejudice they like to imagine. The unpopularity of Jews and Communism shall continue to be buried behind sloganeering. The slogans shut off all debate – exactly as intended.

The boys are silent again. Obviously historical facts are too much for them.

GOD’S CHOSEN SEX

This nonsense about registering “sex offenders” has to be put in perspective. There are many ways of doing it. One might be to illustrate it this way. Joseph Stalin is applying to be a United States citizen. The Department of Naturalization is perusing his application:Hmmm, Mr. Stalin. I see that you mass murdered twenty million people, 80% of them male, in your gulags. I think we can overlook that. Welcome to the United States, Mr. Stalin.” Ten months later: “O My god, Mr. Stalin! You just finger fucked a ten year old girl. You are now a registered sex offender! You must leave the United States at once. You must register with the CIA wherever you go or you will have to repay all that Lend-Lease we gave you during the Second World War.”

Screamingly absurd, you think? Think again. This is exactly what is going on. If Charles Manson were ever paroled for his five or more murders, he would not have to register – anywhere. All he did was mastermind horrible knife killings by his female groupies. But if he had committed a Joe Stalin finger-in-the-pussy, God save him. (Sharon Tate would today be grateful if he had merely bent her over and dicked her.) This is the absolute Alice-In-Wonderland insanity we are faced with today. A woman’s vagina is worth more than a man or woman’s life. Murderers do not have to register, repeat bank robbers do not have to register, criminals with a rap sheet two hundred offenses long do not have to register – but someone who urinates in a public street does (He exposed his genitalia in public, you see. Sharon Stone would laugh.)

It is not my intent to defend rapists or any other criminal. But where did people get this nonsensical idea that sex crimes are special? They are not. Unpleasant though rape (the real thing, as it was formerly distinguished from seduction) is, it is hardly the “crime of all crimes” that the “Special Victims Unit” of “Law and Order” claims. Is rape worse than having your heart cut out by an obsidian knife on an Aztec or Mayan sacrificial altar? Is it worse than being burned at the stake, Joan of Arc style? Is it even worse than having every bone in your body broken by a drunk driver? In actual truth, it is not nearly as bad as any of these things. There has been quite a stink about Korean “pleasure women” used as prostitutes for Japanese soldiers in WW2. But so what? Forcing women to fuck and suck in perfect safety is far less horrible than forcing men to fight for their country. Not one of these “pleasure women” died or suffered any physical injury. The Japanese on Pacific islands were blown to pieces by bombs or horribly burned or suffocated in caves. That is a lot worse than having a dick in your mouth, in this writer’s opinion. An idiot female at the Tailhook dinner party got an obscene 5.2 million dollars for being groped and felt up by the boys. But the boys who were bayoneted and shot on the Bataan death march suffered a lot more. No one paid them a dime for “hostile battlefield environment”.

So what is this Anglo-Saxon fixation on sacred cunt? The explanation is both ugly and simple. Women and their fuck holes are more important than men. It does not matter what happens to men because men are expendable and replaceable. But let those precious breeding cows and their precious pussies get violated – why that is intolerable! Joe Stalin had it right – murder men by the millions but so long as you keep your hands off the tits and ass you can snort illegal Zyklon B with impunity. Just ask Gloria Allred.

It’s not fair that good people get registered as sex offenders, and sent to jail for molesting children while Jews are free to walk around conspiring to do bad things.

MCCARTHY’S UNSTATED MESSAGE

Whatever one thinks of the pros and cons of Joseph McCarthy’s individual charges against specific individuals, one thing is indisputably clear: there was massive Communist penetration of American society at all levels in the years 1930-1950, and not just in the government. This has been confirmed by so many sources and revelations that it is no longer reasonably in dispute. The revelations of Venona, the further confirmation of Venona by the Vassiliev file, the confessions of former Communists, the proven guilt of Hiss and the Rosenbergs, the extreme leftist tilt of the universities and of course, the Walter Durantys of the New York Times prostitute media settle the matter beyond dispute. Another point is equally clear: the Communist subversion of America, 1930-1950, was disproportionately, even predominately, Jewish.

The latter point is why the prostitute press screamed that McCarthy was such a”threat”. He was a threat, not because he threatened “civil liberties” but because he threatened to expose the Jewish power behind Communism. That Jews themselves were aware of this fact is shown by their documented statements: Moishe Katz stated: “In a new war the American Fascists will make a better job on the Jews than Hitler did.” Confirmation of McCarthy’s charges of Communist treason among America’s Jewish population is not hard to find. The leadership of Ambijan, the American Committee for Birobidzhan was secretly controlled by Jewish Communists. Writes Henry Felix Srebrnik: “…the actual behind-the-scenes leader of Ambijan was a Communist Party functionary assigned by the CP. ‘she makes the decisions and outlines the program and policies of the organization, but she remains in the background and is not publicly known as the leader.’ Her connection to the CP was known to the officers of the organization and ‘they undoubtedly condone her relationship with the Party by sponsoring her directives.’ The woman in question, I have deduced from a close reading of the material, was Sasha Small, who was also the secretary of International Labor Defense. F.B.I. Special Agent E.E. Conroy referred to Small in 1945 as a paid functionary of the Communist Party.’ In addition, now that the secret Soviet spy cables known as the Venona documents have been declassified by the F.B.I., Joseph Minton Bernstein, one of Ambijan’s national organizers, has been identified as a contact through which the Soviet military agency, the GRU, communicated with Soviet agents employed by the U.S. government.”

Joseph McCarthy touched the raw nerve of Jewish power hiding behind Communism. It was ironic indeed that he did this at the very time that Joseph Stalin was liquidating Jewish power in Soviet Russia. Had McCarthy come on the scene sooner rather than later, he may have been able to waken the American people to the menace within their midst. Today, the Jewish traitors of “Israel First” work more openly than the Jewish Communist traitors of decades past ever did.

All the sex offenders I know are working as Zionist pimps at Tel Aviv brothels.

DREAMS OF LONG AGO

The charge that Jews were disproportionately involved in Communism in the pre-World War Two days is so well established that it hardly needs verification. Still, it is interesting to read the ever proliferating admissions of the old charge in Jewish reference works. Hardly a year now goes by without some academic book admitting the enormity of the Jewish influence in revolutionary socialism. The latest example is “Dreams of Nationhood: American Jewish Communists and the Soviet Birobidzhan Project, 1924-1951” by Henry Felix Srebrnik. Published in 2010 the introduction to the volume contains an amazingly frank discussion of the Jewish love affair with Communism. Srebrnik, to his credit, dismisses at the outset of his study the shopworn fiction that Communist Jews were “non-Jewish Jews” “who had repudiated the Judaism of their forefathers… ‘a Messianic radicalism among the immigrant Jewish workers…allowed Communism to appeal to some of the deepest traditions of the community.’ The world of Jewish socialism was a secular one and its discourse radical; even so, its roots lay deep within the Jewish tradition, which, although far from monolithic, has always aspired to improve the world. Though there was much in Jewish life that the Jewish Socialists opposed, from Orthodox Judaism to Zionism, such people did not turn to Communism because they were alienated from the Jewish world, but rather because ‘of their urge to act for the sake of an improved society and to better the condition of the Jewish workers.’ This ‘messianic’ aspect of their ideology would also revive the old Judaic ideal of a return to the ‘land of Israel’ by substituting Soviet Russia for Israel as the new ‘Promised Land’. Such people ‘were imbued with a semi-religious attitude to the USS’, which had become for them ‘a dreamland of freedom and equality’.”

Having established this key point, Henry Felix Srebrnik then proceeds to document what many other researchers have affirmed – that Communism, 1920-1950, was a thoroughly Jewish movement. He writes: “The Communist movement attracted urban, professional and intellectual elements, and Jews were heavily represented in all three categories, so, as Melech Epstein has noted, ‘a unique environment favored its spread’ among Jews. At its zenith, the CP’s influence on significant segments within American Jewry ‘exceeded anything experienced in other ethnic communities,’ Henry Feingold has asserted. It was estimated that Jews constituted some 15 per cent of the newly created CPUSA; in some cities, a majority of CPUSA were Jewish. By 1931, at least 19 per cent of the Party was Jewish, and its largest district, New York, was overwhelmingly Jewish in its membership. An even higher proportion of Communist officials were Jews: between 1921 and 1938, ‘no Central Committee had fewer than a one third Jewish membership; most were about 40% Jewish.‘ According to some estimates, during the 1930’s and 1940’s, ‘about half of the Party’s membership was composed of Jews, many with an East European socialist background.’”

This would appear sufficient to document the case but Srebrnik provides more information. “Jack Stachel, the party’s national organizational secretary, who was himself Jewish, told the sixth convention of the CPUSA in 1929 that in Los Angeles ‘practically 90 per cent’ of the membership was Jewish…In Philadelphia, the Communist movement drew the bulk of its members from Jewish immigrants or their children…According to Paul Lyons, in the 1930’s, 75 per cent of the membership of District Three of the CPUSA, which included Philadelphia, was Jewish; as one former leader stated, ‘The Jews dominated the district.’ The Communists also developed social cohesion in Yiddish. “By the early 1920’s in the Jewish community ‘one could observe a new, well-organized Communist wing with its own Jewish journals.’ In his study of the American Jewish left, Arthur Liebman has referred to the various Jewish fraternal orders, newspapers, and unions grouped around the Communist Party as having constituted a distinct ‘Jewish left subculture’…Cultural and intellectual organizations proliferated in the Jewish Communist movement. There was the Artef, the Workers Theater Group founded in 1925…There was the Proletpen, the left-wing writers group headed in the U.S. by Shloime Almazov, Paul Yuditz and A. (Isaac) Raboy…And there was the Jewish Workers University, founded in 1926 to prepare an intelligentsia for the workers movement…Choruses were another ‘of the principal cultural activities of Jewish radicals in the United States’…

So writes Henry Felix Srebrnik in the introduction to his meticulously documented study. Interested readers may peruse the entire volume which is well worth the effort. One of the great merits of reading Jewish scholars like Srebrnik is that the research is based largely on documents published in Yiddish, documents which are incomprehensible to the average university researcher. Thus, an entire universe of suppressed facts is opened up. The implications of the facts thus revealed is drastic. They confirm the enormous penetration of Communism within American Jewry for three decades after the Bolshevik revolution. Of course, this American Jewish love affair did not begin with the Bolshevik revolution. It had been present ever since the Jews began disembarking at Ellis Island in the 1880’s. These Jews had been infected with revolutionary socialism in Czarist Russia before they immigrated to America. The seizure of power by the Communists in Russia generated enormous enthusiasm for Bolshevism in the United States. The famous Palmer raids of 1919-1920 were not based on misguided fear, any more than the investigations of Senator Joseph McCarthy in the 1950’s were based on misguided fear. The fear was real and appropriately targeted. “Dreams of Nationhood” deals primarily with the Soviet Birobidzhan project of 1928 forward. That project had many dimensions. It was designed to create a “Jewish Autonomous Region” (JR) in the Soviet Far East on the Amur River, adjacent to Japanese occupied Manchukuo. But it was also aimed as propaganda to American Jews.

That is an involved subject indeed, as Srebrnik demonstrates. Birobidzhan was designed to resolve the Jewish “nationality problem” which had so befuddled the Marxist theorists of pre-revolutionary Russia. International socialism was to have resolved the ‘Jewish problem’ by integrating them with other workers. But influential Jewish intellectuals like Nachman Syrkin, Chaim Zhitlovsky and Dov Ber Borochov did not want assimilation under socialism. They wanted Jewish nationality within a socialist federation. The Bund, one of the largest of the revolutionary Jewish workers parties in the Czarist Empire, wanted a “territorial solution” along the lines later encompassed by the Birobidzhan project. And, of course, the Zionists wanted their state in Palestine. All these various currents and cross-currents were carried to the United States by the Jews who immigrated there. In 1928 Birobidzhan was proposed by the newly elected General Secretary of the Party, Joseph Stalin. The Party wanted to reinforce the loyalty of the Jews to Communism by giving them the “Jewish nationality” they had craved. The Zionists in Palestine were running into difficulties because of the recalcitrance of the British Mandatory authorities. Birobidzhan, the “second Palestine” for the Jews, was the solution.

“Dreams of Nationhood” goes into elaborate detail on how the Jews of America set up the American Committee for Birobidzhan “(Ambijan) to proselytize for Jewish Communist immigration back to Russia. It had branches in all major American cities and worked in close collaboration with ICOR (the Jewish Association for Colonization in Russia), its Canadian counterpart for the Birobidzhan project. Ambijan was no insignificant operation. It recruited the assistance and support numerous influential people, Jewish and non-Jewish. Among them were the physicist, Albert Einstein and the Arctic explorer, Vilhjalmur Stefansson. Prominent politicians like Henry Wallace, the Progressive Party candidate for president, Senators Claude Pepper, Warren Magnusson and Alban Barkley were prominent supporters, as was the well-known Communist radical, Anna Louise Strong. Ambijan and ICOR merged in 1934 to coordinate their efforts. Srebrnik reproduces many posters of New York Town Hall concerts sponsored by Ambijan in both their Yiddish and English translations. The Birobidzhan project provoked intense debate within the Jewish community. Some Jews thought it a preferable alternative to a Zionist state in Palestine; others had reservations.

As the creation of the Jewish state approached its culmination in 1948, the Communist and Zionist factions in American Jewry started to hold hands. The Soviet Union, which then stood high in the esteem of the Jews for its role in the defeat of the Nazis, moved toward support of the Jewish state. Joint meetings between Ambijan and the Zionists were held. The general “Party line” of the 1946-1947 period was that Birobidzhan and Palestine were not opposing, but complementary endeavors. Jews could be happy in either Birobidzhan or Palestine; Jews should support both. (Or, as Chaim Weizmann’s mother used to say, if the one son were right she would be happy in Russia; if the other son were right, she would be happy in Palestine.) The Soviet Union did more than just support Zionist Israel with words; she allowed massive Jewish immigration to Palestine through her satellite states in Eastern Europe, particularly through Poland and Rumania. The Czech Communists also trained Zionist pilots at Zatec where they then refueled in Communist Yugoslavia on their way to bomb Arabs. When the state of Israel was proclaimed on May 15, 1948 the Chicago office of Ambijan sent a congratulatory telegram to the Soviet ambassador.

From this point on Ambijan and the Birobidzhan project went into steep decline. Stalin and the Bolsheviks never devoted the necessary funds to develop the Jewish autonomous region and factors in the United States put a severe damper on Birobidzhan. First was the switching of Jewish loyalties from the Soviet Union to the newly created state of Israel; next was the impact of Stalin’s anti-Semitic purges starting in 1950. Last but not least was the beginning of Senator Joseph McCarthy’s anti-Communist investigations in 1950, a fact which led to the closure of Ambijan in 1951. And so the plan of “Palestine in Siberia” came to an end. It was essential to sever and deny the Jewish Communist connection. The two decades lure of Birobidzhan on the Jewish mind faded into the past. Henry Felix Srebrnik freely admits that the story of Birobidzhan has lain dormant for decades. It is not hard to understand why. It is a story that cannot be told without examining the inner workings of Jewish Communism. That, and the difficulty of researching in that strange Hebrew language, is the explanation for the disappearance of Birobidzhan from popular awareness.

Boy I can’t believe I’m still talking to myself on this blog post from May of 2009. I must come off looking pretty lonely to spend so much of my time writing posts on a website that hasn’t been updated in over a year.

I suppose you could also figure out that I’m still fixated on having sex with 10 year old girls, and I’m steamed about having to register as a sex offender. I wrote “GOD’S CHOSEN SEX” the day after my fucking Jew parole officer gave me shit about having a subscription to teen magazine out on the coffee table. I think it helps add a little spice to my rather repetitive attempts to link Jews with communism. Even if my rants about my fear of women and fantasies about sex with 10 year old girls aren’t getting to be a little repetitive after all this time as well.

One thing’s new though. I’ve starting wondering what sorts of things would be worse then having a dick in my mouth. Next on the list: Big Red bubble gum. I fucking hate that stuff. I’d take a dick over cinnamon flavored gum any day.

Since I can’t beat John Thames on the facts, I’ll jerk myself off writing infantile satires that display only my complete lack of intelligence and ability. I won’t worry about how stupid I’m looking because I’m too dumb to realize it.

SURVIVOR CONSISTENCY

Jewish proponents of the “mistaken identity” theory of the attack on the U.S.S. Liberty in 1967 focus on inconsistencies of the ships survivors. Thus, they will argue that some of the witnesses before the Naval Court of Inquiry testified that they could spot the Israeli flag on the attacking torpedo boats, and then later said they couldn’t. Or they will argue that some witnesses testified that the attacking planes had identifiable markings; other eyewitnesses said they didn’t. In short, they make a big issue out of the confusion and chaos inherent in such events to try to cover up the truth.

But, under no circumstances do they apply the same standard to the inconsistencies of sacred, unimpeachable, Holocaust “survivors”. The inconsistencies of these professional witnesses on behalf of non-existent “gas chambers” are infinitely greater. Thus, the witnesses testify to impossibly inflated numbers of victims not supported by the German records, to “gas chambers” at camps where it is now known that there were none, to steam chambers and mass electrocutions at Polish camps where such devices are now known never to have existed and multiple other tall tales that defy common sense. In addition, they escaped from more camps than they were ever in, tell multiple inconsistencies to the Nuremberg court and then change their story multiple times years later, like Mel Mermelstein. None of these minor errors in detail affect their credibility. They were so “traumatized” by the non-existent “gas chambers” that their never-ending confusion is entirely understandable. But let the survivors of the U.S.S. Liberty get a few details mixed (assuming that their testimony wasn’t deliberately perjured by the Naval Court of Inquiry as part of an official cover-up) then that proves decisively that the attack was an innocent mistake.

This entertaining double standard is called “survivor consistency” – and it is either applied or ignored depending on who is lying about what.

THE RISE AND FALL OF THE KGB

Messer’s Klehr and Holmes have written another well-researched volume on Soviet espionage in the U.S. It is entirely based on a file given to a Soviet defector, Vassiliev, on Soviet agents in the U.S. It is important to note that Vassiliev was only given access to one file by his superiors, not many others bearing on similar topics. Thus his information, vast as it is, is still only a small fraction of discoveries yet to come. Essentially, Vassiliev provides the real identities of vast numbers of hitherto unidentified code names in the Venona transcripts. The famous journalist I.F. Stone was one such, having worked for the NKVD (as it was then called) twice. Dozens of other “reputable” people are similarly named.

The extent of the Vassiliev revelations is shocking. However, the real issue which they raise is: Does the same situation prevail today in even more virulent form? The Soviet Union is gone but that other Jewish Frankenstein, Zionist Israel, is still with us. How many “reputable” people are working as agents of the Jews in Tel Aviv the same way they once worked for the Jews in Moscow? It is not an idle question as the case of Jonathan Pollard illustrates. Presently the Jew Eric Cantor serves as House Republican majority leader. He has openly stated to Prime Minister Netanyahu that in any conflict between the Obama administration and Israel he will put Israel’s needs first. That is an open declaration of treason. No agent of the Kremlin in the 1930’s, such as Congressman Dickstein of New York who was on the Soviet payroll, would have dared to stand up in the House of Representatives and openly vow allegiance to Joseph Stalin over allegiance to President Roosevelt. The operations of the KGB in the U.S. were vast indeed in the 19930’s and 1940’s but they posed less of a threat to the security of the United States than the operations of the Mossad now.

The U.S. Senate is full of Congressmen and Senators who have pledged absolute loyalty to Israel as the price of their re-election campaigns. These Senators and Congressmen are far more of a danger than the Harry Dexter Whites and Colonel Bernsteins of yesteryear ever were. The Bernsteins and Whites could be rooted out and neutralized. But an entire Congress bought and paid for by alien money and loyal to a foreign country rather than its own is a far greater danger. White and all the rest could assist FDR to provoke Japan into war. But they could not get on the TV and demand war against Iran. They could not stand before AIPAC and demand obeisance to Israel’s every demand. The Jewish Communist subversives of long ago are worth remembering. They are worth remembering, not merely for what they did, but as the forerunners and blood brothers of the “Jews for Israel” traitors of today.

http://thy-weapon-of-war.blogspot.com/2008/11/holocaust-hoax.html

John…keep up the good fight. You are not alone.

To the scumbag trolls – you are NOT going to enjoy my new posting.

Yeah, Hanover. You’re in good company. Scumbag trolls who spam their troll bullshit here on this year and a half old blog post bow their foot thick hockey helmets in prayer to the true gods such as Odin that I don’t succeed in putting their genitals in my mouth.

I have a list Hanover, and it grows daily. Those scumbags need to understand that there’s a vast number of things that are worse then having their genitals in my mouth. I’m here to spread that message. That, and to pick up elementary school chicks.

John…ignore the Metzizah Boys that was NOT ME telling you to keep up the good fight but fifth columnist, scumbag trolls!

Stick to dribbling come shots from the sides of your stupid mouth and wait until you read my next posting.

Well, well – all those who hate free expression have had their mindset exposed as being rather infantile because they cannot tolerate another viewpoint, then fail to open themselves to new factual information. Think of Julian Assange right now where I was locked up two years ago – London’s Wandsworth prison!
The haters of truth run on the Talmudic-Marxist death dialectic of win-lose instead of embracing the Hegelian life-giving dialectic of win-win, where the opposites are conserved in a new synthesis.
That’s how our knowledge grows, not by imprisoning our minds in a childish scapegoat mentality that fears truth as an ideal.
Still, as a teacher I came across a lot of such minds who loved to ruminate in rubbish tips without ever questing for truth and beauty. Such Prime Uglies will never embrace the pulsations of the UNIVERSE!

Cease your puerile attempts to foment dissent betwixt myself and Hanover fist, Dr Fredrick Töben. The true haters of truth know that having a phallus in your mouth is much more enjoyable then myriad activities; none of which can be constrained by such limited modalities as win-lose scenarios are able provide.

Think of all the transcendental realists currently serving time because an infantile public is diametrically opposed to the thought crime of adult sexual intercourse with 12 year old children. Why should we hide from the truth that sex with 12 year old children feels much better then Aztec open heart surgery?

In between Ronnie’s run off at the mouth horseshit, here is something cogent.

FAIRNESS DOCTRINE ON THE INTERNET

The Jews want to shoot down the internet to control the flow of information exposing Jews. But because of the First Amendment to the Constitution, they cannot do this openly. Therefore, a subterfuge is necessary. The subterfuge goes like this: “Extremist” sites are giving the public only one side, a false side, of the story. They are falsely alleging that the Jews are responsible for 09/11, that Jews created Communism, that the Nazi “gas chamber” story is a hoax, etc. The misled public needs to hear both sides of the story. Therefore, the government and the FCC need to provide “balance” by giving the public both sides of the story. Heretical web sites must put out the government’s version side-by-side the heresy. Otherwise, they will be fined or their license withdrawn.

Now, the first thing to note about this “fairness” approach is that it applies only to web sites that the government does not like. It imposes no such “tell both sides” requirements on viewpoints the government approves. Thus, Alan Dershowitz, a propagandist for Israel, shall not be required to present the Palestinian position, Marxist web sites shall not be required to present the pro-capitalist position, Holocaust survivors shall not be required to present the Holocaust Denial position. Thus, “equal time” exists only for the government to propagandize against information detrimental to the government’s interests or the interest of the tribe that controls it. The Jews who are promoting this nonsense, like Cass Sunstein, know exactly what they are doing. They hide their desire to censor the truth under the pretense of informing the public. They only wish to counter disinformation, not censor people’s thinking. This line is a charade.

The government has no business “informing” the public of anything. The government’s sole duty with the internet is to allow it to function. That way the public can choose what it wants to read and what it wants to believe. All governments have inherent credibility problems. They lie about everything. Therefore, the government, of all parties, should have nothing to say about correcting anyone’s “misinformation”.

Ronnie’s gonna be too busy wiping fung’s runny excrement from his waiting mouth.

Dr. Tobin, I invite you to go to my blog and check out my latest posting. I believe that I have finally driven the stake through the dead and bloated corpse known as the Holocau$t.

Apologies for the misspelling of your surname in the previous posting, Dr. Töben. At any rate…I hope that Germany rescinds those stupid laws that have interfered in your life.

“Deniers”, my ass. The stupid bastards pushing this dead horse are deniers of REALITY.

Thank you hANOVER fIST

As a teacher I respect your questing for truth and beauty and your embracing of the pulsations of the universe. I respect those brave souls who embrace the Hegelian life-giving dialectic and oppose the childish scapegoat mentality that fears truth as an ideal hater, preferring instead to run on the Talmudic-Marxist death dialectic and don’t embrace the Hegelian life-giving dialectic where the opposites are conserved in a new synthesis of truth and beauty embracing of the pulsations of the universe.

And I appreciate your kind wishes for Germany to rescind those stupid Talmudic-Marxist death dialectic laws.

As a teacher though, I said “I was locked up” in “London’s Wandsworth prison” which is not in Germany you foot thick hockey helmet, Odin loving, shit-for-brains!

I know where London’s Wandsworth prison is you lying mendicant. It’s right next to Madrid in South America. We’re talking a 5 minute boat ride from the port of Aqaba. You better watch out. Once I get my Ouija board back I’m going to communicate with my true gods and have them kick your Talmudic big nosed Jew asses.

THE SURE TEST

Anyone who doubts that Jews run the United States should apply a simple test. Try saying that Arab oil money runs the United States. You will not be fired from your job or be blacklisted in your career. Next, try saying that the Jews own Congress and that the Holocaust is a hoax. You will be fired on the spot and wind up working at MacDonald’s because of an invisible black list. That is the simplest, surest test of who really runs the United States.

INNOCENCE BY PROCLAMATION

Whenever the Jews are caught with their pants down on the facts, they resort to certain standard responses. Thus, whenever confronted with the Jewish involvement in Communism or the slave trade, they will assert that the facts are taken out of context, that only a small minority of Jews are involved in such activities, that the facts may be true of one specific instance but not all instances, that the behavior was the product of unique historical circumstances or of oppression, etc. In short, every possible excuse is trotted out of the closet. But never, ever, do Jews concede: “Yes, it’s true. We did it.” Jews have refined these techniques to a fine art. Jews who were Communists were non-Jewish Jews who repudiated their Jewishness; Zionists who invaded Palestine were somehow the victims of the Arabs they were dispossessing; Jews in Russia sex slaving women were victims of Czarist oppression; Jewish tax collectors gouging on commission were merely doing the king’s bidding, not robbing the citizen’s blind, on and on it goes.

The one constant in all the bullshit is that Jews are always innocent. Always – that is axiomatic. To reach any other conclusion is anti-Semitism. What anti-Semitism means is: Jews are always innocent regardless of the facts. Facts cannot be used to convict Jews of any collective offense. This is true because Jews say so. If you think otherwise you are an irrational bigot no matter what the evidence shows. Anti-Semitism is innocence by proclamation. Innocence by proclamation cannot be enforced by evidence; it can only be enforced by fear. The implied threat behind innocence by proclamation is: If you do not buy it, your career will be destroyed. You will become an unemployable social outcast. And that is why people tremble before the accusation of anti-Semitism. It is a threat – and one that will be enforced.

TRAITORS ON BEHALF OF TWO COUNTRIES

American Jews have always been traitors on behalf of two countries – Soviet Russia and Zionist Israel. During the heyday of the workers paradise, Jews in America served as actual and de facto agents of Soviet Communism. They propagandized on behalf of Communism in their Yiddish journals, they held Communist meetings in their synagogues and community centers and they recruited Jews to leave America and return to the Soviet paradise. More than this, they comprised at least half the membership of the American Communist Party. Most of the actual spies and espionage agents who worked on behalf of the Soviet Union were Jews. The names of the Rosenbergs, the Oppenheimers, Fuchs and all the rest are well known. Today, the Jews betray America on behalf of Israel the same way they once betrayed America on behalf of the Jewish commissars. They turn the entire Islamic world against America by supporting Israel. They make the entire .S. Congress into prostitutes for Israel. Like the Rosenbergs, treasonous Jews such as Jonathan Pollard betray American secrets to Israel. AIPAC engages in massive spying for Israel while posing as a legitimate lobby. Jews in America are routinely recruited by the Mossad to do Israel’s dirty work, just as Jews in America were routinely recruited by the Soviet NKVD. The media and the prostitute press, entirely controlled by Jews, routinely lie and cover up for Israel. Everything that Israel does, no matter how egregious, is painted as “self-defense”. Suicide bombers are alleged to be the problem, not the Zionist theft of an Arab land.

Jews in America are what they have always been, a state-within-the-state. They put Jewish interests above the interests of the nation they inhabit. These charges are easy to document. When Israel deliberately attacked the U.S.S. Liberty in 1967, Jews and their prostitutes in the .S. government bought the transparently false excuse that the attack was a case of “mistaken identity”. Israel’s interests came first, the truth came second. A second excellent example is the 09/11 attack. Every intelligence agency in the world knows that the twin towers were brought down by mini nuclear explosions – and that the Jews did it. But the truth is covered up – because Israel’s interests require it. Jews are traitors, pure and simple. As Stephen Sondlight phrased it, Jews live in America but their real country is Israel. And, as the examples quoted prove, Jews will always betray the United States on behalf of their real country.

PSEUDO-REVISIONIST IN THE MOST PEJORATIVE SENSE

A Professor Timothy Snyder has written a book, “Bloodlands”, arguing the thesis that the two world wars in Eastern Europe, particularly the Second World War, made the area comprising Poland, the Baltic countries, Ukraine and Russia the genocide fields of the twentieth century. Although one can hardly argue the general thesis, the specifics of Professor Snyder’s argument leave much to be desired. He is Jewish and thus endorses the Holocaust myth. However, it is obvious that Professor Snyder is acquainted with the “denial” literature. He asserts that the original Nazi plan was to deport Jews, first to Madagascar and later to Russia. Supposedly, the Nazis only turned to mass murdering Jews by the millions when the war started to go sour. No evidence is adduced for the claim. How the Germans could have murdered millions of Jews while simultaneously deploying limited forces against the overwhelming might of the Red Army is a logistical problem left unexplained. Professor Snyder is careful to say that the Jews were killed by “gas chambers” and bullets. This careful choice of words is no doubt a concession to unacknowledged research that has disproved the “gas chambers”.

Snyder devotes a great deal of space in “Bloodlands” to the comparative kill totals of the Nazis and Soviets. In the process he demonstrates his servility to historical legend while trying to write “historical truth”. Thus, he claims that the Nazis deliberately starved to death millions of Soviet POW’s to death. He thus ignores the Soviet policy of scorched earth warfare, in which the retreating Red Army destroyed all food and grain stocks to hinder the advancing Germans. Thus, Professor Snyder blames the Germans for a crime committed by the Soviets against their own troops. Professor Snyder, in his eagerness to describe a German rampage in Russia, seems curiously unaware that more and more historians, including Russian ones, are documenting that Stalin was planning his own attack before Hitler struck first. Timothy Snyder waxes very poetic over the fate of Poland. This follows a well-established apologetic of both left and right wing writers of portraying the Poles as innocent victims. This historical mythology ignores the merciless persecution by the Poles of all the ethnic minorities within their territories, not just the Germans, as well as their rejection of the pre-war peace offers by Hitler and the Poles own well-documented belligerence.

“Bloodlands” is not totally without merit. Snyder acknowledges Stalin’s mass murders but employs the standard ivory tower tactic of trying to minimize them. Thus, the great Ukrainian famine is downsized from the more probable seven to ten million victims to an alleged three million. The Jewish involvement in Communism is acknowledged but passed off as a reaction to “anti-Semitism”. The Balts are blamed for liquidating Jews as soon as the Germans invaded but at least the massacres of the retreating Jewish NKVD commissars are mentioned too. Timothy Snyder honestly acknowledges the great liars on behalf of Communism like the journalists Walter Duranty and Louis Fischer. Still, he seems to feel that somehow the Jews were the main victims of the “bloodlands” of Eastern Europe. Perhaps this is implicit, unconscious racism which holds that Jewish suffering is worse than anybody else’s suffering; perhaps it is a reluctance to delve more deeply into the behavior of the Jewish commissars. In short, Timothy Snyder has done a half-way job with the facts. He cannot be accused of whitewashing the facts completely but as a genuine attempt to get behind the real issues of Eastern Europe between two world wars, his work is pseudo-revisionist in the most pejorative sense.

THE SURE TEST

Anyone who doubts that Jews run the United States should apply a simple test. Try saying that Arab oil money runs the United States. You will not be fired from your job or be blacklisted in your career. Next, try saying that the Blacks own Congress and that Slavery is a hoax. You will be fired on the spot and wind up working at MacDonald’s because of an invisible “black” list. That is the simplest, surest test of who really runs the United States

Just ask Stephen Walt and J.J. Mearsheimer

http://www.theoccidentalobserver.net/2010/12/projection-who-were-the-victims-in-the-ukraine/
The bullshit and lie lobby has added a mythical two milion to the mythical six million.

http://www.inconvenienthistory.com/archive/2010/volume_2/number_4/halfway_between_reality_and_myth.php

Note admission by Jewish author during the war about how one-half to two-thirds of the Jews in major Russian cities had been evacuated ahead of the advancing Germans. Note also admissions of how Jews were being used to repair railroad tracks and produce goods for the Wehrmacht.

THE SURE TEST

Anyone who doubts that Jews run the United States should apply a simple test. Try saying that Arab oil money runs the United States. You will not be fired from your job or be blacklisted in your career.

Next, try saying that “When I get on the plane, I got to tell you, if I see people who are in Muslim garb and I think, you know, they are identifying themselves first and foremost as Muslims, I get worried. I get nervous.”

You will be fired on the spot because of an invisible “black” list. That is the simplest, surest test of who really runs the United States

Just ask Juan Williams

I believe it was Jews who fired Juan Williams. They fired him for challenging the Jewish multicultural ideal.
My dick was between my ears, as usual, so I can’t figure out the obvious.

THEY WORK TOWARD ONE END

Opponents of Jewish conspiracy theories will often argue that major differences of opinion among Jews preclude any possibility of such a “conspiracy”. How, they ask, can there be any such conspiracy when Jews disagree about everything? But the argument is deceptive. Jews have many internal disagreements, surely. But on certain key issues Jews are as one in their thought. They all support the fiction of racial equality; they all support open borders and non-white immigration to the white west; they all believe that Jews should have equal rights in the Diaspora while pledging ultimate Jewish loyalty to Israel. And, most revealing of all, Jews oppose all these things in Israel. Arabs have no equality with Jews; immigration to Israel is for Jews only; the Arabs expelled in 1948 have no rights to their former country.

Jews will deny that they exercise any international power while simultaneously boasting of it. Thus, the Jews will denounce the Protocols a “myth” while a Barbara Lerner Specter in Sweden will confess that Jews are leading the drive for multi-culturalism in Europe and that they will be resented because of that “leading role”. The real proof of Jewish international power lies in the concept called the “common denominator”. If one observes certain trends in all nations and that those trends are constantly promoted in all instances by Jews, then the unavoidable conclusion is that there is a Jewish agenda at work. It is not difficult to establish that Jews have, in the past, pursued such agendas. The revolutions of 1848 in Europe were Jewish instigated in all countries. Revolutionary Marxism in Russia and Eastern Europe were entirely Jewish dominated from 1880-1950. Jews all over the world were in love with Soviet Russia so long as the Jewish commissars reigned. Jews worked, decade after decade, for a Jewish state in Palestine. They overcame both British reluctance and Arab opposition to achieve their end. In the process, they manipulated both the British Empire, the American government and the United Nations. Jews are very clearly capable of exercising coordinated power.

Anyone who has read Kevin MacDonald’s meticulously documented works knows that Jews in the United States have worked for decades to overthrow white racial dominance in the United States. This was true both in 1951-1952 during the debates on the McCarran Act and again in 1964-1965 when the 1921 Immigration Act was finally overthrown. From 1965 to present the United States have been subjected to ever increasing Third World population invasions. The responsibility for this racial invasion rests with people named Emmanuel Celler, Jacob Javits, Simon Rifkind, Charles Shumer, Elizabeth Holtzmann and many others. It was always the American Jewish Committee which filed amicus curiae, “friend of the court” briefs, with the judiciary to overturn so-called “racially discriminatory” statutes. During this same time period the Jewish National Fund in Israel was pursuing its purely discriminatory policy of leasing land to Jews on the specific condition that the Jew holding the lease would never sublease the land to any Arab. The “anti-discrimination” Jews in the United States voiced no objection.

Today, as Barbara Lerner Specter notes, Jews are driving Europe toward multi-culturalism over the objections of the white Europeans. They pursue the same objective in the Old World that they pursue in the New World. Why? Consistency of purpose is proof of an agenda. Why do Jews make war on white racial homogeneity? Do they do it to enhance their own power? Jews doubtless remember that a white, united country in Germany once seriously threatened their power. The best way of preventing this from happening again is to fragment the population. This is the only believable explanation. Jews cannot be taken seriously when they claim to be for the oppressed. They obviously do not care one whit for the welfare of the Palestinians they dispossessed.

Those who claim that there is no Jewish agenda in the world will not face facts. Not merely is the agenda there, it is ever more brazenly proclaimed. The white race is being systematically destroyed and the Jews are doing it. One need not be an apologist for Adolf Hitler to recognize this. In truth, the charge of “Nazi!” is used as an epithet to inhibit those who would speak plain truth. Love Der Fuehrer or damn him as you prefer, Dear Reader. But, under no circumstances, deny the fact that Jews are destroying the white race world wide. If you do, you sign your own death warrant.

THE UNION JACK OF ZIONIST GEORGE

Ladies and Gentlemen:

I thank you for inviting me to your conference. The Tea Party would be a wonderful thing but for one fact – you are fools. Did I shock you by calling you fools? Let me shock you some more – you are worse than fools – you are suckers. You have not noticed a simple fact. Your Tea Party is nothing but a front for Israel First Jews. These Jews tell you that they want to get the government off your back. They will do this by continuing to spend hundreds of billions of dollars they do not have on wars in Iraq, Afghanistan and soon Iran. They will borrow the money so long as they are able; when they can no longer borrow the Federal Reserve will buy the debt and hyper-inflate the currency. That is not a formula for getting the government off your back; it is a formula for bankrupting the United States fighting Israel’s wars.

The Tea Party should stand for America First; instead it stands for “Israel-uber-alles”. If you had not noticed, your Tea Party prompters are all shekel salesman for the Zionist state. Look at Glenn Beck. This man tells you that the United States and its way of life are threatened by “radical Islam”. He does not tell you that America is hated because of its support of the criminal state of Israel. He does not suggest that cutting off the countless billions the United States sends to Israel night be more cost effective than spending billions to fight Israel’s wars with American blood. He does not discuss the loss to the American Treasury of so-called “charitable contributions” by wealthy American Jews to finance Israel’s theft of Arab lands. The fake fiscal conservatism shall not be allowed to interfere with Zionist fundraising.

A Tea Party shekel salesman will talk endlessly about “American values”. But the values of the Founding Fathers were non-intervention in foreign affairs and good will to all nations. George Washington warned against the dangers of partiality toward a foreign favorite. John Quincy Adams, the son of John Adams, warned that if Americans ventured abroad in search of monsters to destroy, she would cease to be a beacon of liberty to the rest of the world. These Americans did not equate American ideology with Zionist ideology. They never believed that a foreign nation’s fight was America’s fight.

The Tea Party does not represent America or Americans. It represents Jews who want to fly Israel’s flag behind the American flag. It is a fake patriotism to lure Americans to their doom. Representative Ron Paul has refused to join the Tea Party because he, unlike you, ladies and gentlemen, recognizes the Tea Party for what it really is. If you want to save your country, ladies and gentlemen, you must grow up. You must see political reality for what it is. Here is an alien, cancerous force in your society which controls both sides of the political spectrum. It offers false alternatives so that nothing changes, no matter which party holds power. This force controls the Tea Party, as it controls everything else.

The Tea Party need not wear the swastika, for the swastika does not represent American values. But the Tea Party must recognize, as so many Americans once recognized, that Jews are not Americans either in spirit or in fact. Between the two world wars American Jews were agents of the Soviet Union; from 1948 to today they have been agents of the state of Israel. Until the Tea Party opposes the blue-and-white of Israel as the Union Jack of the Zionist George, nothing shall change in America. Therefore, the Tea Party has a simple alternative. Either identify the real target, or go barking into oblivion, like a pack of dogs chasing the wrong scent.

WAS PARIS 1919 THE END OF THE WHITE RACE?

The white race is on the decline world wide. Its birth rate is below replacement level; its industrial and economic strength is waning. How did it come to pass? It all began in 1914 when a disastrous world war shattered the foundations of the white world. Some will claim that World War Two was the true shattering of the foundations. But World War Two was, after all, merely the inevitable product of the First World War. World War One bled the white west dry in many ways. It wasted the best blood of Europe by the millions. The genetic loss was incalculable. Hundreds of thousands of young men died before they could generate any offspring. The British and the French paid a terrible price. The English population has been composed of working class drones ever since the blood baths of the Somme and Passchendale. The French had to import Negroes and Mulattos from their colonial empires because the native French could not replace the battlefield hecatombs. The foundations of empire overseas were also shattered. The subject peoples could witness the whites destroying themselves. They concluded that the time for revolution was ripe. Innumerable revolts broke out in India, Lebanon and Iraq. The revolts were temporarily crushed but the genie was out of the bottle.

Financially, the treasure expended on the conflict ended forever “La Belle Epoque”. The gold standard was overthrown and inflation has reigned ever since. The map of Europe was redrawn in a fashion guaranteed to produce revision by force and violence. The Second World War completed the process of decomposition. The remainders of the European colonial regimes were liquidated and Europe as the power center of world politics vanished from the map. The United States temporarily stepped into the shoes of Europe, 1945-1965, but now that the United States too, is an exhausted giant, economically bankrupt and suffering the ravages of racial invasion. The end of the west, 1914-1965, has been the story of fratricidal warfare and intervention in overseas conflicts. Today, the United States, having learned all the wrong lessons from two world wars, continues the process of dissolution by engaging in unaffordably expensive overseas wars. Its native white population suffers while charlatans far more criminal than the cartographers of Versailles redraw the global map.

DO JEWS DESERVE THE DEATH PENALTY?

Such a question as is posed by the title of this essay is usually considered too dangerous to even consider. But the question is not in the least facetious. Jews have been guilty of many offenses throughout the centuries, not the least of which is the attempted murder of the white race world wide. What makes that any less than a death penalty offense? The first degree murder of a single individual can get a criminal the death penalty in many jurisdictions. Is the attempted extermination of an entire race of humanity any less of a crime? The Jews are responsible for expelling an entire population in Palestine and stealing their country. How many Arabs would like to give the Jews the death penalty for that one? Jews brought Communism on the world and killed many millions in the process. Would it be too unkind to take the compensatory casualties out of their hide? Adolf Hitler obviously did not think so. For centuries the Jews gouged the common people as tax collectors by commission. Peasants paying 40% per annum on their loans did not hesitate to cut Jewish throats. The Roman Empire endured gigantic Jewish rebellions in which populations of entire cities were exterminated by Jewish massacres. The legions responded in kind.

Jews have quite a list of offenses to their credit. Since they continue to commit the same offenses over and over again, the case for clemency is extremely weak. Jews will object to collective Jewish responsibility for their sins. If Jews acted merely as individuals, that would be an acceptable argument. But Jews do not act as individuals; they act as an international nation. Jewish causes, such as support for Israel or the early Soviet Union, receive virtually unanimous Jewish support. Jews cannot act collectively then demand individual responsibility. That Jews do good things as well as bad is no excuse either. A murderer cannot escape punishment merely because his life has been otherwise exemplary.

The Jews have it coming, big time. Their crimes date back centuries. Today, they hide behind a gigantic lie of “gas chambers” and six million supposed deaths. And that is the final nail in their coffin. Even if they were to be forgiven all their other sins, the enforcement of this hoax is the conclusive proof that they have not changed and never will. The ruthless destruction of any who challenge the hoax is the best rebuttal to those who believe that the Jews deserve clemency. What clemency do the Jews have for those who challenge them?

John,

You are a sick, sick man.

The ruthless destruction of any who challenge the hoax

The sad state of your life has nothing to do with actual Jews, and everything to do with your obsession with Jews. You ruthlessly destroy yourself with this obsession, and that’s the truth.

Jews have been guilty of many offenses throughout the centuries, not the least of which is the attempted murder of the white race world wide

You just posted that whites killed themselves through “fratricidal warfare” and because their “birth rate is below replacement level” you dumbass.

I plead not guilty . . . Honky

IS ISRAEL AN OUTPOST OF WESTERN CIVILIZATION?

A Belgian politician is making a name for himself by linking anti-Moslem immigration with support for Israel. His pitch is that both Europeans and Israelis are threatened by Arabs and thus should unite against the common threat. This is very cagey and is doubtless a bid for Jewish support. The last thing this politician wants is to be labeled a white supremacist and a “Nazi”; therefore co-opt the Jews to his cause. The Belgian politico goes a step further by arguing that Israel is an outpost of western civilization in Arabia. This is complete nonsense, despite the popularity of the line. Theodore Herzl and his fellow Zionists desired a Jewish state in Palestine because they believed that there was no place for Jews in a Europe that was hostile to them. Hence, Jews should form their own state where they could flourish in isolation. That is hardly an expression of the compatibility of Judaism with western values, our clever Belgian politico notwithstanding. The response shall of course be made that such may have been true at one time but it is true no longer. Israel has evolved from its original conception and now represents a beacon of western civilization.

It is well to remember that these promises have been heard before. When the English first planted Zionism in Palestine, the argument was made that a Jewish state would protect the Suez Canal and safeguard imperial interests. A scant thirty years later, the “ally” was blowing up English soldiers and officials’ right and left as the British lion departed Palestine with its tail between its legs. The Zionist state that Belgian politicos describe as an outpost of western values was sold to English politicians as a means of weaning Jews away from Bolshevism. Give the Jews a state of their own and they would stop igniting the flames of Bolshevik revolution all over Europe. That is a strange curative indeed for a people representing the values of the west.

It would be idle to criticize anti-immigration politicos too severely. Their objective of removing racial aliens is a noble one. All politicians are snake oil salesmen. Their objective is not to write accurate history but to concoct a line that sells. If Mr. Belgian politician were logically consistent, he would support expelling both Arabs and Jews from Europe. After all, Khazars are as alien to the west as Muslims. But that would never do. Jews control both the money and the politicians. Therefore, do not mention that the Jews were the treasurers and tax collectors of medieval Spain or that the Jews expelled from Ferdinand and Isabella’s Spain became the advisors of the Ottoman Sultans in their war against Christendom. Jews and Arabs were once allies in the war against Christendom; now Jews and Christians are allies in the war against Arabs, “Believe It Or Not”.

I never argued that whites do not bear a large share of the blame for their own problems but that hardly let’s the Jews off the hook. As for the state of my life (which is quite good), what do you know about that other than what I choose to tell you?

http://www.codoh.com/gcgv/gcgvself.html

As for the state of my life (which is quite good), what do you know about that other than what I choose to tell you?

I know that you’ve spent the last year of your life preparing incessant anti Semitic rants in a dark corner of the internet for an audience of about 2 people.

That doesn’t exactly scream “healthy social life” or “mentally stable”

It is hardly the only place I post. Besides, if it is as insignificant as you claim, why are you paying attention?

P.S. Get rid of the photo. You are as ugly as you are stupid.

THE PRETENSE IS OVER

The “debate” on the historic Jewish role in Communism on the internet is pretty much over. Actually, there never was a debate, merely obfuscation by the other side. Presently, they have pretty much thrown in the towel. One Jewish scribe after another has conceded that Jews were disproportionately involved in all varieties of socialism. Even Milton Friedman, the economist, makes no bones about the Jewish fondness for revolutionary socialism. The matter is still not one for polite society but, when pressed, Jewish leaders and intellectuals will no longer deny it as they once did.

This newly found honesty may have come from the passing of Communism in Russia; it more probably comes from internet publishing and the disclosures of authors like Professor Kevin MacDonald and the late Alexander Solzhenitsyn, both of whom have written extensively on Jewish involvement in Marxism. Jewish Communism, in other words, was 100% true. All the shrieks of denial, the proclamations of offended virtue and the accusations of “How dare you?” were simply lies. These decades of lying about the real Jewish involvement in Communism are not without implications. Jews are covering up many things beside who unleashed Communism upon the world. They have yet to come clean on their “gas chamber” hoax or the real history of the state of Israel. But at least the pretense on Jewish Bolshevism is over.

http://www.thefreemanonline.org/columns/capitalism-and-the-jews/

Milton Friedman on Jewish connection with Communism/Socialism

I note that the university lecturer, Joseph Welch, is no longer responding. Matbe he should Email professor Friedman and tell him that he is all wet on Jews and Communism, just like John Thames.

NEW STANDARDS IN TERRORISM

In 1944 the Roosevelt administration staged a gigantic sedition trial in which approximately 35 defendants were prosecuted because of views which resembled, in certain respects, those of the German Nazis. The trial collapsed after many months because none of the defendants could be proved to have committed an overt act against American forces at war with the Germans. However, now that the Supreme Court has ruled that aid to terrorism need not involve an overt act, such as money or buying weapons, but merely moral and intellectual support, then anyone who says a kind word for Palestinians, doubts the reality of the “War on Terror”, espouses conspiracy theories or does historical research undermining media, ethnic or government myths can be labeled an “accomplice of terrorism”. The chilling effect on dissent is obvious.

Of course, all this is purely hypocritical. The same Zionist controlled judiciary that comes up with this nonsense is well acquainted with the history of the state of Israel. Justices Kagan and Ginsberg now that both Menachem Begin and Yitzhak Shamir, future Prime Ministers of the state of Israel, were wanted by the British Palestine Police Force for terrorist attacks against English soldiers and officials. And, speaking of lending “moral assistance” to terrorists, they undoubtedly remember Mr. Ben Hecht’s famous letter to the New York Herald Tribune in May 1947 in which he boasted that “every time a terrorist blows up a British train or building, the Jews of America make a little holiday in their hearts”. Ben Hecht’s famous play “A Flag Is Born” might have been construed as promoting terrorism, if an English judge were hearing the case. And then, the vast Zionist smuggling of arms and munitions to Palestine would qualify as aiding and abetting terrorism even under more old fashioned definitions. The Supreme Court shall ignore these precedents for “aiding and abetting terrorism” because concocted jurisprudence is merely a cover for more sinister objectives.

The Supreme Court does not practice Constitutional jurisprudence; it practices “ethnic-specific” jurisprudence. Terrorism is to be condoned and tolerated when it promotes Zionist-Jewish objectives; it is to be condemned when it can be used as a scapegoat for wider designs. “Is terrorism good (or bad) for the Jews” is the test.

THE PROSTITUTION OF THE MEDIA

Book after book appears proving that Joseph McCarthy was closer to the truth than he knew. The media pay no attention. Why? That is the key to the real issue lurking behind Joseph McCarthy. Communism is, after all, dead and no longer relevant. Yet the media, which made McCarthy’s name synonymous with character assassination, refuse to clear McCarthy’s name. They continue to insist that McCarthy was evil, despite the overwhelming confirmation of his charges. Clearly, something more is at stake here than the mere factual issue of whether or not there was Communist penetration of American society and government.

One issue lurking behind the purely factual question of Communism is the liberal “fronting” for Communism. America was full of liberal sympathizers for the workers paradise. They were very much its accessories and sycophants. That record of lying on behalf of Lenin’s and Stalin’s Russia is well documented and extremely damning. Since the record of pro-Communism could not be denied, the best evasive tactic was to scream that liberally inclined individuals were being persecuted for their beliefs. But there is a more fundamental reason for the media refusal to come clean on Joseph McCarthy. McCarthy’s anti-Communist campaign was implicitly an anti-Jewish campaign. The Communists he was exposing were disproportionately Jewish. The media, being Jewish controlled, will not forgive McCarthy this sin merely because McCarthy was factually accurate about Communists. The fact that McCarthy surrounded himself with anti-Communist Jews during his life time did not help him then; nor does it help his reputation with the media Jews now.

McCarthy was hated by the vast majority of America’s Jews during his lifetime; he remains hated by them still. That, in simple terms, is the real reason Joseph McCarthy has not been rehabilitated, despite the confirmation of his charges.

P.S. Get rid of the photo. You are as ugly as you are stupid.

Awe John. I already knew I wasn’t your type. I’m not 12 and I’m not from Spain.

It is hardly the only place I post.

Oh I know you post on other out dated blog posts as well.

You posted on an almost 5 year old feminist’s blog post of 2-23-06 on 12-18-10. I’m sure lots of people read that one.

You also posted on a blog created 10-23-09 on 9-6-2010 and went 40 some odd posts of screen scrolling raving lunacy without anyone saying anything at all to encourage you.

A Holocaust denial post of 4-30-07 you’re right in there on 11-21-08. You posted there for 2 years.

And that’s just the John Thames alias. I know you use and have used others. Of course, the only conclusions that can be drawn is that you are clearly the bane of people who forget to clean out their post archive and you’re batshit insane.

What it proves, pizza face, is that there are no rebuttals to my facts or logic. Why don’t you get your side kick, the long lost Joseph Welch, to do your postings for you?

there are no rebuttals to my facts or logic

John, you post on threads that any sane person would have considered dead for years. You’re not beating a dead horse. You’re beating the ground that a horse once walked on 3 years ago. That’s about as insane as it gets.

You couldn’t do a worse job of spreading your paranoid message of Jews and how they are going to get you for your opinions on Jews. Hell, you’d reach more people if you wrote it in Latin on the walls of ice caves in Antarctica. The only reason I’m here is so that one day, when you finally flip out and try to exact your own little endlosung I can say that I did everything in my power to keep your stupid racist ass occupied.

How I distribute my material (s well as how I amuse myself debating with idiots) is my business. As to the facts, you have no case and never did.

And one other thing, donkey face. When the truth of everything I’ve said comes out of the Russian archives, you will have a kosher turd sticking out of your mouth as you try to explain how dumb you’ve been all your life.

HATE SPEECH AND CRIME

The Jews are putting out a lot of propaganda, in the wake of the shooting of the Arizona Congresswoman, about how “hate speech” leads to unfortunate incidents. It is all nonsense. During the heyday of both the New Deal and Senator Joseph McCarthy, all kinds of political invective was flying. None of it led to the shooting either of Roosevelt or McCarthy. (There was one failed attempted shooting of Roosevelt in Miami. Huey Long in Louisiana was also shot.) Clearly, if high emotions and political invective led to shootings of politicians, 1933-1954 should have been the high water mark of political assassination in the United States.

In actual fact, the high water mark of political assassination in the United States came in 1890-1920 period in which many millions of Eastern European socialists (many of them Jews) entered the United States. An anarchist shot President McKinley; the anarchists Sacco and Vanzetti were similarly disposed toward violence. It would appear then, that a disposition toward violence has more to do with ethnic background and revolutionary ideology than political rhetoric. The same tendency was observable in Czarist Russia and pre-state Israel. Hessia Helfman, Hirsch Linkert, Vera Finger, Gershuni, Mordecai Bogrov and others all specialized in assassinating Czarist ministers. All were Jewish. The Jewess, Fanya Kaplan of the Social Revolutionary Party, shot and wounded Vladimir Lenin in the early 1920’s. In 1946-1948 terrorism flourished in revolutionary Palestine. Menachem Begin, Yitzhak Shamir, Dov Gruner, Nathan Yellin-Mor and others killed and maimed British soldiers and officials, amply aided by pro-terror Jews in America and the United Kingdom who shipped arms and munitions to the Jewish underground in Palestine. In Zionism’s earlier days, Ben Zvi, the colleague of David Ben-Gurion, ordered the assassination of Professor Jan De Hahn, an anti-Zionist Jew who had become inconvenient.

Abe Foxman of the ADL, who never misses an opportunity to ling terrorism with right wing extremism, shall not be issuing White Papers on forgotten facts. “Terrorism” is an elastic concept, malleable to political ends. This is why only certain kinds of terror merit condemnation. The other kind of terror is kept in reserve, to be employed when circumstances are right.

ARE THE JEWS WISING UP?

Students of the subject will recall that when the Balfour Declaration was first issued, numerous prominent English Jews objected to the declaration, fearing that it would raise the issue of Jewish dual loyalties, offend the Arabs of Palestine and create grave future problems for Jewry world wide. Those objections were disregarded at the time. Now, the chickens of Zionism have come home to roost. Israel’s atrocious mistreatment of the Palestinian Arabs is leading to anti-Semitism world wide. Some of the more intelligent Jews are starting to realize this. Mick Davis, a very wealthy and influential precious metals dealer in London, is one such. Davis has been increasingly critical of Israel’s behavior, arguing, in essence, that Israel is a rope around his neck. Davis perceives that Jews around the world, having supported Israel for decades, will one day be held accountable as the accessories and accomplices of the Zionist state’s crimes.

These arguments of Mick Davis have provoked a considerable backlash from the Zionists. He has been accused of being a traitor to Zionism and the Jewish people. Such a reaction is predictable but Mick Davis is entirely correct. Israel is getting the Jewish people in big trouble world wide. And it is only going to get worse. The Zionists are becoming more intransigent, not less. Their abuses grow daily. Whether it is launching invasions of Gaza or murdering passengers on hijacked relief ships, Israel has no regard for international law or world opinion. Mr. Netenyahu builds settlements on confiscated Palestinian land then piously demands bribes from Barack Obama to be (temporarily) dissuaded. Mick Davis is right. A noose is being wrapped around his neck by the state of Israel.

It would be nice if Mr. Davis’ fellow Jews would see the wisdom of his criticisms. However, it is unlikely that they will. Jews have too much emotional capital invested in Israel to back off it now. They created Israel in original sin by expelling its rightful inhabitants and they are no more cognizant of their sins now than they were in 1948. Mick Davis and other sensible Jews will eventually pay the price for the folly of Zionism, their well reasoned objections notwithstanding.

SALIVATING AT THE PROSPECT

The recent shooting of the Arizona Congresswoman sparked the media Jews into a frenzy of barking. Before any of the facts were known the media immediately characterized the assassin as a right wing lunatic. Now it appears that he was possibly Jewish and certainly no right winger. The particular facts are not the issue; the issue is the agenda showing its teeth before the facts were known. The Jews very much want to impose a “thought crimes” police state. Therefore, any random act of violence must be characterized as the product of an evil agenda that supposedly generates violence. That will be the alleged causal connection to justify the clamp down. When the clamp down comes the internet shall be shut down, right wingers, pro-Palestinians and Holocaust Deniers shall be incarcerated and executed. “Crime think” shall be everywhere.

“Crime think” is basically the crime of revealing every fact of history and politics that the Jews do not want known. These facts show the Jewish power hiding behind the New World Order. Jews do not fear random acts of violence. What they fear is nationally and racially organized violence designed to root out Jewish power. That will come when the average white understands who has really been tearing down his society for decades; hence, the need to demonize information by linking it to purposeless criminal acts.

A STILLNESS AT NUREMBERG

The treatment of Robert E. Lee and the Army of Virginia by Ulysses S. Grant at Appamatox forms an interesting comparison with the treatment of the Germans by the Nuremberg tribunal. Grant assured Lee that no surrendering Confederate soldier would be put on trial for treason. There would be no reprisals. Food and medical care would be available to any soldier needing it. No “war crimes” would be invented ex-post facto. In short, the war was over. Any reprisals against the South came from Thaddeus Stevens and the radical Republicans, not from Grant. Now, contrast this magnanimity from “butcher” Grant with the hypocrisy and brutality of the Allies at Nuremberg. Crimes that no one heard of were invented for the occasion, deeds were either crimes or not crimes depending on who committed them, the victors sat in judgment of their own charges and a vengeful ethnic minority orchestrated the entire macabre farce behind the scenes.

Ulysses S. Grant would never have done what the British, Americans, Soviet Russians, French and Jews did at Nuremberg. But then, Ulysses S. Grant expelled Jewish traders from the Union lines because they were profiting from the misery of war. He would never have appointed John Woods Short, a Brooklyn Jew, to hang Robert E. Lee, his West Point classmate, as a “war criminal”.

THE TWO RIGHT WINGS

There are two right wings in the United States. The first is the kosherized, Israel-uber-alles, God-fearing right that believes the capitalism that exports American jobs to India is the same system that made Andrew Carnegie wealthy. Then there is the politically aware right that knows the names of the Jewish commissars, laughs at fake “gas chambers” and knows that Khazars have no right to Arab Palestine. The two right wings do have points of similarity. They both want a white country and reduced government. They both oppose social engineering and reversal of traditional sex roles. But the one right wing knows from whence the poison is flowing; the other right wing is thoroughly confused.

The Jews have no fear of the one right wing because they own it. As Ron Paul says, the Tea Party has been taken over by the Israel First neo-cons. The other right wing concerns them. It may have little money but it has the facts straight. And it publishes relentlessly on the internet. This right wing cannot be co-opted. It can only be destroyed before the truth comes out. If Americans follow the one right wing, they are finished. If they follow the other right wing, they still have a slim chance.

GARFIELD GOES HOLOCAUST DENIAL

Odie the dumb dog is munching on his Zyklon B bone as Garfield explains “Holocaust Denial”.

“Listen, Odie. The Germans were using the Jews as labor for their war effort. The Jews were dying of typhus so the Germans deloused the camps with Zyklon B. That killed the bugs that were spreading the disease. Get It?”

“Woof.”

“No, you canine idiot. The crematory ovens were to burn the bodies of the Jews who died of disease. The rest of the Jews were deported into Russia to work for the Germans. They re-laid rail road lines and things like that.”

“Meow?”

“You’re a dog, remember? Stop changing the story like Holocaust survivors. Now, when the Germans lost the war, all the Jews who had been hiding out in Russia returned to play commissar in Eastern Europe. The rest of them invaded the Arabs in Palestine or went to America. Got it now?”

“Woof, woof!”

“What about Nuremberg, you say? You’re making progress, Odie. Good question. Nuremberg was run by Jews behind the scene. The evidence presented there was bogus. Documents were forged and testimonies were coerced.”

“Woof, woof, woof!”

“Very good, Odie. Now listen to this. The gas chambers show no traces of hydrogen cyanide residue. They are not properly sealed, ventilated or designed. They were simply morgues for holding diseased bodies waiting to be burned in the crematory ovens. That’s all.”

“Woof, woof, woof and more woof!”

“You graduated, Odie. Now take off the skull cap and put on your helmet. You’ve just been drafted into the legion of Holocaust Denial.”

So your saying your legion is full of a bunch of moron dogs?

Yep, that about sums up the legion of holocaust denial, and I swear that wasn’t me writing as john

Yeah. One day the master race will figure out how to make a Word press and Gravatar account.

Until that day lots of fun will be had.

Though I had begun to think that he took me up on my suggestion that he would have better success in ice caves in Antarctica. I guess I was foolish to think that he would stop posting here simply because it’s a 2 year old post that no one reads.

Even if the website went down he’d be out on the sidewalk scribbling anti-jewish comments with the crayons his hospital gives him

Odie Dogs:

Your Fuehrer has spoken.

Go meow!

LESSONS IN TERRORISM

Those who would be terrorists need to learn simple lessons. The first lesson is that a terrorist cannot function without the support of the population to which he appeals. If he does not have that support, then he will fail. Moreover, he will have no refuge. His own people will turn him in. Successful terrorists always have the backing of the population. The classic example is the Zionist terrorists of British Mandatory Palestine. The British could never apprehend the majority of the Zionist terrorists because the Jewish population would shelter them and refuse to turn them in. The entire Jewish population would smuggle arms and store munitions for the terrorists. The Jews in America and Europe would smuggle aid to the terrorists across international boundaries. The English could not cope with it. They could find no informers to help them. The Zionists, however, could find Jews working in the British Mandatory government who would inform them of English counter-measures. Every time the English would conduct an arms search or a sweep for terrorists, the Jews would have advance word.

Until white Americans are united behind white underground terrorists the same way that the Jews were united behind their underground terrorists, all attempts at terrorism shall fail.

http://ha-historion.blogspot.com/2010/02/orthodoxy-and-communism-part-i.html

From the Jewish History Channel. Please note the popularity of Communism among the rabbis and Hassidim as being consistent with ancient Jewish religious practices, particularly those of the Essenes.

Why is it that the white supremacist’s narrative always depicts white folks as a bunch of bumbling idiots?

They lost control of government,
the media
Religion
Society in general.

Hell John’s up there complaining that they don’t even breed right.

Man these guys are hard pressed to prove that white folks are the master race. They can’t seem to get anything right.

Some people manage to get everything wrong, like you, Fang. That is a far greater achievment. And what about those master race kikes in Israel?

http://www.suite101.com/content/jewish-communists-in-the-polish-security-forces-a306166

No Jews in Communism, hmm? Maybe you should forward to anus brain Welch.

I never would have guessed that all this time you included such moronic errors in your posts because you believe being wrong is a great achievement.

No wonder you’re a holocaust denier. How much more wrong could you get?

The error is all yours, moron.

KHAZAR CONSERVATISM

Ever since the collapse of the Soviet Union, the United States has been awash in what might be called “Khazar Conservatism”. Khazar Conservatism ardently desires that the United States fight Israel’s wars of Middle East Empire. Accordingly, a Khazar Conservative school of history has been created, which holds that the U.S. and Europe now face a menace called “Islamo-Fascism”, a continuation of the Ottoman Turkish invasions of Europe in the fourteenth through seventeenth centuries. An outstanding example of this Khazar Conservative history is the Zionist blog, “Gates of Vienna” which attempts to paint the present difficulties with Islam as another siege of 1683 threatening the very existence of the west.

Of course, this is all nonsense. Islam as a militant ideology on the march died several centuries ago. Ottoman Turkey was the “sick man of Europe” in World War One days. Its empire collapsed in the post-World War one peace settlements that are the real cause of present day difficulties. Before getting into that subject it is first necessary to examine certain facts of Islamic-Christian warfare that the Khazar Conservatives, such as Pamela Geller and David Horowitz, deliberately ignore. The Jews, during the heyday of Islamic-Christian warfare, were the allies of the Moslems. Moslem Spain, for seven hundred years, used the Jews as finance ministers and tax collectors to exploit the Christian population. Anti-Jewish riots broke out, again and again, as the population rebelled against Jewish-Moslem financial extortion. And indeed, it was the Jews who opened the gates of the cities of Visigothic Spain to the Arab general, Tarik. When the monarchs, Ferdinand and Isabella, expelled the Jews in 1492, the Jews fled to Ottoman Turkey, where they became the leading financiers and advisors to the Turkish Sultans. Donna Gracia Mendoza, Joseph Nasi and Solomon Ashkenazi, among others, counseled the Sultans on how to make war on, and take revenge against, the Christian states of Europe. These Jews had many contacts among their brethren still in Europe. They used these contacts to report to the Sultans on Christian military strength, naval dispositions and the like. These Jews believed that “Islamo-Fascism” (whatever that is) was a good thing.

Today, Khazar conservatives like Geller, Horowitz, Bernard Lewis and others, want whites to believe that the Islamic crusade against Europe which these Jews once supported, is a bad thing. The lack of credibility is obvious. The real source of present day tensions, as noted, is the disastrous carving up of the Middle East after World War One. This mistake, plus the planting of a Jewish state in Arab Palestine, is the cause of Islamic resentment against the west. The Khazar Conservatives assert, without proof, that Islam hates the west. Yet when the Arab nationalists began their revolt for independence against the Ottoman Sultan, Abdul Hamid, in the early twentieth century, they looked to the west, specifically the British Empire, for assistance. Many of these young Arab intellectuals were educated at Cambridge and Oxford before returning to their home lands. They brought with them English ideas of constitutional government and liberal democracy. When the revolt against the German allied Ottoman Turks began in 1915, the second year of the Great War, the Sheriff Hussein sought out the assistance of the much admired British Empire. He believed to the end of his life that the English were a great and honorable people whose word was to be trusted. When he found out otherwise, he blamed the betrayal on David Lloyd George, the Prime Minister who was indeed a Zionist agent.

The English military and colonial administration in mandatory Palestine was always opposed to the Balfour declaration which they rightly regarded as a betrayal of the Arabs who had been their battlefield comrades in the Great War. The Arab themselves had several “Arab Offices” in London, where former British soldiers and Palestine officials pleaded their case before the Zionist controlled officials in London and Parliament. Albert Hourani and Izzat Tanous were prominent in these efforts. Englishmen such as the MP, Edward Spears and the journalist, J.M.N. Jeffries, participated in these overtures. An American investigatory commission to Palestine, headed by Charles C. Crane and Henry King of Oberlin College, reported to President Woodrow Wilson in 1919 that the Arabs of Palestine-Syria were overwhelmingly opposed to the creation of a Jewish state in their country. They further opined that a Jewish state could only be created by force and that such a state would permanently inflame the Middle East. Their wise prognostications were ignored.

A further expression of support for the Arabs came from the English press lord, Alfred Harmsworth, Lord Northcliffe. As chief proprietor of the London Times, Northcliffe was planning a series of articles exposing Zionist ambitions in the Holy Land. He was probably kidnapped and murdered by Zionists in Paris, using the excuse of increasing insanity. As these examples show, there never was any inherent conflict between Islam and the west. Many efforts were made for Islamic-European rapprochement, only to be thwarted by Zionist intrigue. That was the problem in Lord Northcliffe’s day; it remains the problem today.

THE PSEUDO-PATRIOTISM OF THE PSEUDO-CONSERVATIVES

One of the consequences of the switching of Jewish loyalties from the old Soviet Union to Israel has been the rise of revisionist anti-Communism. Revisionist anti-Communism is the digging out of the historical closet all the facts that show McCarthy, HUAC and the Permanent investigations Subcommittee of the Senate Judiciary Committee were right. Why is it now permissible to talk about facts that were denounced as “character assassination” decades ago? Some will say – it is the emergence of new information. New information there is, surely. But that is not the real explanation. The real explanation is that the Jewish agenda has changed. In the days of Jewish Communism Jews had to deny – at all costs – that there were any Communists in the government or Hollywood. Why? Because the Communists being exposed were overwhelmingly Jewish. Now that Communism has fallen and the state of Israel is the “only democracy in the Middle East”, the Jews have a different strategy. They wish to convince Americans that there is a great evil that threatens them – an evil called “Islamo-Fascism”. This evil represents an internal security threat – the same internal security threat that McCarthy was fighting! Therefore, resurrect McCarthy, pronounce “Islamo-Fascism” the new Communism and demonize anti-Zionist conservatives and pro-Palestinian liberals as the new Alger Hisses.

This is laughable beyond description when one considers that the American government, Hollywood and the media are permeated at all levels with Israel First Jewish traitors. It is hard to believe that any thinking mind could actually believe such nonsense. But the internet is full of websites and blogs taking this transparent propaganda seriously. If Americans had any historical knowledge they could not fall for such nonsense. Jews have always subscribed to two ideologies – Communism or Zionism (sometimes both). They have always been divided between the two ideologies. Joseph Stalin’s anti-Jewish campaign in the Soviet Union post-1950 and the rise of the state of Israel in 1948 caused a seismic shift in Jewish loyalties. Many of the new Jewish supporters of Israel retained their Marxist, extreme leftist politics; others were supporters of Vladimir Jabotinsky’s Revisionist Zionists (the ideological forebears of Israel’s Likud and America’s neo-conservatives). Now that the Jewish Communist past has been forgotten, the false patriots of neo-conservatism find it useful to resurrect the Senator they worked so hard to destroy.

ADOLESCENTS OF THE INTELLECT

One of the benefits of living in a democracy is that any fool can have an opinion (unless it is an opinion of which Jews disapprove, in which case the penalty is instant career destruction). Thus, the internet blogs overflow with ignoramuses, pontificating on subjects they have never studied. They will deny the facts on Jewish commissars, tell you that the Moslems are out to conquer the world because they heard on the TV set, proclaim that the blacks in darkest Africa are the equal of whites and that you are an evil racist if you do not believe it or assert that Palestine was an empty desert before the Zionists came. They have never read a book on anything they presume to discuss or spent an hour in a research library but they know all about it regardless.

Their ignorance is invincible. They huff and puff with self-righteous indignation if you point out any of the documented facts they deny. Thus, they will call you an “anti-Semite”, a “Holocaust Denier”, a “bigot”, a “hater”, a “distorter of facts”, a “pseudo-historian” and every other epithet they can hurl against you. They hiss like the vampire at the sign of the cross. But when it comes to refutation, they offer Nuremberg forgeries, Glen Beck and Rush Limbaugh commentaries and History Channel specials. The general rule is that they do not want to hear anything that contradicts their pre-conceived notions. If you prove them wrong, they hate you all the more. The internet blogs overflow with such minds. These are the people who go to the polls and elect the same charlatans who lie to them, again and again. These are the people who never wise up and who would scream like bawling brats if they were forced to wise up.

Debating with such types us entertaining, but futile. They are adolescents of the intellect.

NOT SO IDLE THREATS

A Jewess lawyer has sued President Jimmy Carter for having defamed Israel in his new book, “Palestine: Peace, Not Apartheid”. The ex-president and his publisher, Simon and Schuster, are accused of perpetrating fraud against the Zionist state by misrepresenting facts and encouraging anti-Israeli actions. The lawsuit has no merit and shall of course be thrown out. That is a given. But what is fascinating is the brazen mindset involved. Israel was founded on fraud. The early Zionists, asserted, again and again, that they had no intention of creating a Jewish state at the expense of the Arabs. The Balfour Declaration itself eschewed the use of the word state. Nahum Sokolow, the famous Zionist leader, asserted in the introduction of his two volume “History of Zionism” that “it was never the intention of Zionism to establish a Jewish state in Palestine”. Max Nordau admitted that the term “Heimstaat” (German for “national home”) was intended “to deceive by its mildness until such time as we were ready to announce our real aim”. How can a movement founded on fraud and deception possibly accuse anyone else of fraud and deception against Israel?

As already said, the lawsuit is meaningless. What is meaningful is the increasing arrogance of these people. A man in Australia was just sentenced to three years in prison for insulting a Jew with harsh language. Dissidents all over the world are being sent to prison for questioning the mythical “gas chambers” of Adolf Hitler. Clearly, an evil pattern is emerging. Back in the 1940’s an American rabbi wrote that Jews needed to “fill the prisons with anti-Semitic gangsters”. It was an idle threat in 1944. It is an idle threat no longer.

THE REAL THREAT TO YOUR CIVIL LIBERTIES

There is much propaganda about the alleged threat of “Islamo-Fascism” these days. But it is the people screaming about Islamo-Fascism who are the real threat to your civil liberties. These people want you to fight and die on behalf of Israel. Their propaganda about the “War of the Worlds” between the West and Islam is on a par with the propaganda of the British Empire about the evil German “Huns” planning to do the same thing. These people are Israel First Jews and their sycophants. These Jews control the Congress and drive from public office any who refuse to give Israel anything it wants. They destroy the careers of any who dare to speak out publicly against the state of Israel or the Jews. Rick Sanchez, Helen Thomas, Oliver Stone and Mel Gibson are among those who have felt the wrath of Zionism. These Jews, who yap about the dangers of Islamo-Fascism, have passed laws against questioning the myth of the Nazi extermination of the Jews. Throughout Canada and Europe dissidents by the dozen have been imprisoned for questioning the eternal verities of the Nuremberg Trial. Moslem Imams are not yet throwing Americans into jail for swallowing hook, line and sinker the “truths” of America-Israel-Public Affairs Committee.

There can be no doubt that Islam is a harsh, intolerant and war like religion. But that can be no excuse for provoking an unnecessary war with an equally intolerant, militant, aggressive Zionism which has never recognized the right of the Palestinians to their land. In all the propaganda about the evils of Islam, there is never the slightest reference to the amazingly intolerant statements of fanatical Zionism. Thus, Mr. Vladimir Jabotinsky is never quoted on the TV set. “Zionism is a colonizing adventure and it stands or falls on the question of armed force. “ “It is important to speak Hebrew but it is more important to shoot.” The late rabbi Meir Kahane stated that “the Arabs are mad dogs who must be driven from Israel.” The followers of Baruch Goldstein, who shot down forty Arabs at prayer in a mosque, glorified the deed by saying: “He was the sweetest Jew who ever lived”, “We don’t think he killed enough but it was a good start”, “a thousand dead Jews are not worth a live Jews fingernail”, etc. Intolerance and fanaticism are to be charged against the Arabs, not against the Chosen People of Karl Marx.

AESOP’S ARAB TALES

A ferocious Arab lion is screaming in agony over a Zionist thorn called “Israel” in its paw. Along comes kindly, helpful Uncle Sam, who pulls the Zionist thorn out. The ferocious Arab lion turns into a happily meowing, contented kitten. Isn’t politics simple?

THE NEW BATTLE OF LEPANTO

When the old League of Nations first proposed a mandate over Palestine many Arab leaders thought awarding the mandate to freedom loving Americans would be better than awarding it to the imperialistic British. In those days American prestige was very high in the Arab world. The evil people of Islam had no thought of conquering the world in those days; they were more concerned with preventing the conquest of Palestine by the Zionists instead. One famous American, Charles Crane, was affectionately named “Harun al-Rashid”, after the famous Caliph, for his services in writing a report opposing the creation of a Jewish state in Arab Palestine. Americans were welcome and admired throughout the Arabian peninsula.

No one in those days had ever heard of a slumbering Islamic conspiracy to conquer the world. That was supposedly an Imperial German plot. The same Turks who had penetrated Eastern Europe in 1526 and 1683 had just been defeated and their “Islamo-Fascist” empire partitioned. Just how were Palestine, Trans-Jordan, Lebanon, Iraq and Syria to conquer the world when Sykes-Picot had just conquered them? The ringleaders of the vast Islamic conspiracy revolted against the British Empire in Palestine in 1920, 1921, 1929 and 1936-1939 but could not dislodge the Raj. They had not yet learned to hijack jet airliners, steer them through sleeping air defense systems and fly with pin point accuracy into two trade centers that were blown up from within. They wrote impassioned position papers demanding the repeal of the Balfour Declaration but got nowhere until Jewish thugs persuaded the British by more basic methods in 1946-1948.

The vast Islamic conspiracy to rule the world was in its infancy in those days. But all that has changed. The impotent Arabs of 1917-1948 easily defeated the American Army twice in Iraq, they go from victory to victory in Afghanistan and terrorize American soldiers with their long range firepower. Their scimitars cannot wait to disembark at Ellis Island as Jews fear for their heads. Auda Abu-Tay and Thomas Edward Lawrence overrun AIPAC with a cavalry charge and are massacring Israeli lobbyists on the floor of the Senate. Everyone can see this as they as they listen to Katie Couric describe the carnage. It is the “War of the Worlds” as broadcast by Sarnoff, Polinsky and Goldensen.

Do not laugh, Dear Reader. This, in all seriousness, is what you are asked to believe. Do not read the historical facts, read the script. Do not doubt Jeff Zucker, Mortimer Zuckerman and Rupert Murdoch. If you do, you are an anti-Semite. Man the barricades, for the new battle of Lepanto is about to sail past the American fleet in the Persian Gulf.

They huff and puff with self-righteous indignation if you point out any of the documented facts they deny. Thus, they will call you an “anti-Semite”, a “Holocaust Denier”, a “bigot”, a “hater”, a “distorter of facts”, a “pseudo-historian” and every other epithet they can hurl against you

Anti-semite noun 1. a dope. 2. someone who says this: “The Jews have it coming, big time. Their crimes date back centuries.”

Holocaust Denier noun 1. an idiot. 2. Someone who says this: “gaskammer does not translate gas chamber. It was probably nothing more than a testing device for gas traces after a delousing operation”

Bigot noun 1. a loser. 2. someone who says this: Whenever blacks are freed from white rule they relapse into the jungle. Everyone knows why. . . Blacks know perfectly that defective black genes, not white racism, is the cause of their problems.

Hater noun 1. a lonely guy in a trailer who goes to the local library for free internet. 2. someone who says this: “The point, since you seem incapable of grasping it, is that I really don’t like you Fangfuck, or your colleagues.”

Distorter of Facts noun 1. a high school dropout. 2. someone who says this: “Transjordan lacked an outlet to the sea.”

Pseudo-historian noun 1. a Hitler lover. 2. someone who says this: “President Johnson resigned from the Senate Whip to become the “go-nowhere vice president” and that “the first income tax was passed after WW1 and “the Titanic investigation ignored the lack of lifeboats and “the JNF owns a majority of the land of Israel.”

Ronnie is back to his usual irrelevancies. Nothing ever changes.

SHABBATAI ZEVI REMEMBERED

The Jews pose as exemplars of rationality and progress. But many episodes in their history prove otherwise. One was the great revolt against Rome, a suicidal endeavor if ever there were one. But an even better example of the Jewish insanity hiding beneath the veneer of rationality was the 17th century Messiah, Shabbatai Zevi. Zevi claimed to be the proverbial Messiah, come to lead the Jews to the Promised Land. He generated wild enthusiasm among all the Jews of Europe. In every country in which he appeared, seemingly rational Jews, men of worth and influence, abandoned their businesses and positions to follow Zevi, the Messiah, back to Palestine. The effect was hypnotic. None of these Jews asked themselves how Zevi would wrest Palestine from the hands of the obdurate Ottoman Sultan. It mattered not. Thousands upon thousands of Jews trekked to Turkey. The newspapers of the day commented savagely and sarcastically on the insanity of the Jews. The sheer lunacy of Zevi’s “Return to Zion” provoked merciless mirth from Christian Europe.

Shabbatai Zevi’s expedition reached a predictable end. When the “King of the Jews” met the Sultan, the Sultan proposed to test both the sincerity and the immortality of his new guest. The Sultan proposed to shoot arrows at Zevi to see if he was as divine as claimed. As an alternative, Zevi could convert to Islam. Zevi naturally chose the latter course. His crusade collapsed. The Christian Europeans had a field day. Jews all over Europe were mocked as psychopaths. Ancient Roman descriptions of Jews as worshippers of pigs were revived. The murderers of Christ were subjects of never ending satire. The Jews slunk back into their ghettos, mortified.

The Jews have not changed since Zevi’s day. They now have a false Messiah called the state of Israel. This donkey’s ass of a state succeeded with the Ottoman Sultan where Zevi failed. The British Army under Edmund Allenby and the British Foreign Office under Arthur James Balfour provided the miracle that the shaman Shabbatai could not. The Zionist zealots in the U.S. Congress, otherwise known as Republican neo-cons, want to set the entire Middle East ablaze for Israel’s benefit. One such is representative Steve Cohen; another is representative Eric Cantor. There are many others. When the United States collapses because of fighting Israel’s wars of Middle East empire, the Shabbatai Zevi’s of Zionism shall drag the Jews of America down with them. The Chosen People, who now ride high, shall be the horse’s asses of a failed faith. No one in the world will want them because of their rape of the Palestinians. They will be required to wear the swastika in public when the truth about their “gas chamber” hoax comes out. They will become, once again, what they have been throughout history, the outcasts of society, despised and loathed by all civilized peoples.

RATIONAL ANALYSIS

One of the big reasons for the backwardness of the Middle East is the low level of the intelligence of the people who live there. IQ in Egypt is not too high. It is obviously not a good idea to allow low IQ Moslems into Europe, just as it is not a good idea to allow low IQ Hispanics into the U.S. Moslems are unquestionably culturally and racially alien to white civilization and do not belong. Their religion is aggressive and intolerant. But they are not part of a world-wide conspiracy. Islam would still slumber peacefully were it not for the agitation of Zionism and political partition.

The Arab world is hopelessly divided. They could not unite at the time of the 1948 war. Their armies could not or would not unite against the Zionists; it hardly seems likely that they could unite against the west today. During the Arab revolt of World War One not all Arab tribes united against the Turks; some remained neutral, others fought on behalf of the Turks. In the 1950’s and 1960’s, Egypt and Syria were usually at loggerheads, even though temporarily aligned during the United Arab Republic (U.A.R.) of 1958-1961. Iran and Iraq were involved in a decade long war before the Iranian revolution of Ayatollah Kohmeini. The Hashemites of Jordan have remained stable far longer than the other Arab states in the region, largely thanks to excellent British tutelage and military training under Sir John Bagot Glubb. But even the Jordanians had their moment of confrontation against the extremists of the PLO during the Black Hand days of the early 1970’s.

In short, the Arabs are far more likely to continue fighting among themselves than they are to start marching on the west. The true Islamic threat to the west is the same threat posed by the Mexicans – massive immigration and higher birth rates. Everyone wants to talk about a phony threat – something called “Islamo-Fascism”. Islamo-Fascism is a concoction of political propaganda. It aims to make an intolerant religion the target when the real irritant is a Zionist intrusion backed by outside support. Had Moslems not been allowed into Europe by stupid immigration policies and the crime of Zionism not been planted in Palestine, Islam would be stewing in its own juice back in the Middle East where it belongs.

QUOTATIONS PROVE THE CASE

The proponents of the myth of Islamo-Fascism always like to pull out odious quotations from the Koran or other public statements of Moslem fundamentalists to establish their case. There is no doubt that the odious statements are true. But they would never, ever, dare to use the same technique against the former evil of Jewish Bolshevism. Why, that would be defaming God’s Chosen People for the sins of Jewish revolutionaries! It would be worse than quoting Dr. Joseph Goebbels. It would be possible to come up with hundreds of juicy quotations but let’s just use a few.

“…Millions of Jewish youths all over Eastern Europe…turned to Communism…”

Zionews (New York: New Zionist Organization, June 30, 1941, p.2 111/18)

“Up to 50% (of the Jews in the Soviet Union) are engaged as officials, clerks and in the intellectual professions. In the totalitarian system the Jew, instead of being engaged in trade and business, has been the official, the employee of the State.”

Kurt Blumenfeld in Jewish Frontier (New York) January 1942, p.9

“Since its very inception, the Communist Party has made strenuous efforts to win members among Jews.”

Dr. Alexander S. Kohanski, in Contemporary Jewish Record (New York: American Jewish Committee) September-October 1940, p.471

“The Communists are Jews, and Russia is being entirely administered by them. They are in every (Soviet) Government office, in every bureau, in every newspaper office.” (Moscow, October 27, 1923)

Claire Sheridan, in The New York World, December 13, 1923, p.13

Nazi propaganda! Nazi propaganda! So scream the Prophets of “Islamo-Fascism” who never tire of quoting Mohammed-bin-Whoever on how the West shall perish by the sword of Allah.

Ronnie:

The port of asshole is located on the backside of your Khazar butt. Try to remember not to defecate out your mouth.

ALICE ROSENBAUM

As Carlos Whitlock Porter has observed the real purpose of right wing Jewish agendas is to dupe whites into accepting left wing social agendas. A good example is the Objectivism of Alice Rosenbaum (Ayn Rand). Rosenbaum espoused two notions:

(1) that racism was an abysmal form of collectivism

and

(2) that an unborn child was merely potential rather than actual life.

Rosenbaum never offered any evidence for her assertion that all races were inherently equal in intellectual capacity. She never bothered to explain why blacks consistently lagged behind whites in school performance or why their crime rate was ten times as high. Indeed, she resorted to the typically Jewish tactic of analogizing any discussion of racial differences to Nazi anti-Semitism. Rosenbaum/Rand would never concede that whites, as a group, might have racial interests perfectly compatible with their individual interests. Indeed, Rand and her Objectivists were demanding the abolition of pro-white immigration laws in the 1960’s because those discriminated against individuals because of their race. Rosenbaum’s position on abortion was typically Talmudic. She argued that a fetus was merely potential, rather than actual life. She further argued that the convenience of the actual living being, the mother, took precedence over the developmental rights of the merely potential fetus. This argument was merely the standard Talmudic position. Per the Talmud, a fetus is considered a rodef, an aggressor, which invades the woman’s womb. She has the right to expel that invader if she does not want it. The fetus does not acquire nefesh, or human status, until seven days after birth. If it dies before the seven days have elapsed, it is not entitled to be buried as a human being. Naturally, Rand did not tell her readers the true origins of her supposedly profound philosophical views.

Alice Rosenbaum, who died in 1982, was also a fervent supporter of the Zionist state of Israel. Long before the rise of the Israeli revisionist historians, she put out all the standard Zionist myths about Israel – that it was an advanced technological society, that the Arabs were sand niggers, that Arabs were terrorists, that Palestine was an empty desert before the Jews came, etc. In short, the great apostle of “reason” was completely irrational when it came to facing facts on her real country. Alice Rosenbaum would never concede that American support for Israel was prejudicing American interests in the Middle East. Nor would she concede that there was anything to the dual loyalty charge that so concerned the anti-Zionist Jews of Lord Balfour’s day. Ayn Rand /Alice Rosenbaum was a typical Vladimir Jabotinsky Revisionist Zionist. Like Jabotinsky she was a fervent supporter of pure capitalism. But even more, she was a fervent apostle of a Zionist state. Jabotinsky was intellectually more honest than Rand/Rosenbaum. Writing in the 1920’s Jabotinsky admitted that the Arabs were not savages. They were civilized and long settled on the land. He admitted that they were deeply attached to their soil and would never surrender it unless they were confronted by an iron wall of bayonets that would destroy all hope.

Ayn Rand/Alice Rosenbaum was an outstanding example of a Jewish intellectual fraud using false premises and tortured dialectics to sell right wing Americans a bill of goods. Although her support of free market economics had something to be said for it, she was otherwise a Zionist charlatan. She deserves to be remembered, not as a great thinker, but as an exemplar and a paradigm of Jewish deception.

the real purpose of right wing Jewish agendas is to dupe whites

And, according to the white supremacists, the Jews have been kicking ass at this for centuries. So if we are to measure intellectual capacity as a function of how easily duped a group is, the white supremacists are loath to argue the supremacy of a group that is consistently duped by a supposed inferior group.

Doesn’t it seem odd to you that a self proclaimed supreme race can’t get its collective heads out its collective asses long enough to be in a position to stop blaming other races for its own inferiority?

Fang Stupid:

Why don’t you get your head out of your charming ass about fake “gas chambers” and a mythical “six million” before you preach to others about being duped? As to whites being a master race, it seems to me that they are presently utter fools, marching lemming like to their destruction.
Whites were not always so stupid about the Chosen. Up to the Second World War they had a pretty good grasp of the subject. The French philosophes of the Enlightenment, Diderot, D’holbach and especially Voltaire, said things about them that would make Adolf Hitler blush.

I believe that it is blacks, not whites, who consistently blame other races for their own failures. Once again, your thinking is off the mark.

Why don’t you get your head out of your charming ass about fake “gas chambers” and a mythical “six million”

Hey, I’m not the one who’s argument hinges on my friends all being a bunch of morons. That’s your argument, not mine.

myths about Israel – that it was an advanced technological society

Heheh you think Israel is not an advanced technological society?

The percentage of Israelis engaged in scientific and technological inquiry, and the amount spent on research and development in relation to gross domestic product, is amongst the highest in the world.

Israel ranks fourth in the world in scientific activity as measured by the number of scientific publications per million citizens.

Israel’s percentage of the total number of scientific articles published worldwide is almost 10 times higher than its percentage of the world’s population.

Israel has seven research universities, and they are ranked among the top 100 academic institutions in the world in scientific disciplines.

Israel is one of the world’s most prolific innovators in advanced technologies, and is widely seen second only to Silicon Valley as a high-tech cluster.

Besides, Ayn Rand was one of the most outspoken anti-communists of her age, a bitter critic of the Soviet Union, and testified as a friendly witness before the House Un-American Activities Committee.

Come now, Ron. Of course John was tricked by the tricky Jewess Ayn Rand. He’s white, remember? It’s like her job to trick dumb white guys like him. John Galt is just an elaborate double reverse inverted psyop designed to trick people into becoming communists so that Jews can loan them money at high interest. It’s all very simple. Too bad white folks are too dumb to “get” it.

Hell, according to John, they are now too stupid to even breed right.

Hows that breeding thing going for you John? Still at zero? Must be because all the white women are too stupid to realize that the Jews are wrong to elevate them to an equal status with men. If only they were smarter and realized that they are inferior to a man you might have a shot at propagating.

Oh well.

Hey, Ronnie:

And how much of that high powered technology did your Zionist genius friends steal from the US? Why don’t you ask Jonathan Pollard. He might be able to clue you in. And speaking of all those nuclear weapons that Israel does not have. Did you ever read about how Mr. Shapiro helped his Zionist buddies to some unauthorized plutonium from that NUMEC plant in Pennsylvania back in 1965? Or that kidnapped Norwegian uranium ore ship in 1972?

Fang Suck:

Recite for me the Othodox refrain:

“Blessed be thou who hast not made me a goy or a woman.”

Then read how a minyan or quorum cannot be reached if ten Jewish males are not present. (Women don’t qualify in the Orthodox scheme.)

Stupid, lying assholes. I never wrote that Alice Rosenbaum was a Communist. I wrote that she was a Jabotinsky Zionist. Don’t reproduce, Fang. The world has too many fools already. As for Ronnie, he fucks frogs.

http://www.veteranstoday.com/2010/12/05/paul-balles-chickens-come-home-to-roost/

Well, ain’t Israel wonderful? Keep on sucking Jew cock, Ronnie, while your favorite frog fucks you up the ass.

I’m sorry, John I don’t follow. You think that women are inferior because they can’t pray with you and 9 other guys? Does that mean you’re Jewish? Is that what you are arguing?

You must be one confused racist.

Fang stupid,

The answer’s clear to anyone who isn’t a complete idiot.

1. Jews are smarter then white people. They trick us all the time, and I mean all the time.

2. Jews are right about women being inferior. They know a women’s place and they know how to keep her there.

3. Jews try and trick us into thinking that women are equal so that women will refuse to mate with dumb white guys.

4. Jews make it illegal to have sex with children, thus denying us the only group that white guys are smart enough to trick into having sex.

5. I wish I was a Jew so that I could have sex and oppress women.

And how much of that high powered technology did your Zionist genius friends steal from the US?

None, but that’s besides the point.

You said there was a myth about Israel, that it was an advanced technological society and it is no myth, Israel is a hightech superpower. Besides:

How can Israel steal its high ranking in the number of scientific publications per million citizens from the US?

How can Israel’s extremely high percentage of scientific articles be stolen from the US?

24% of Israel’s workforce holds university degrees, third highest in the industrialized world – did they all steal their degrees from the US?

Israel has the highest number of scientists and technicians in the workforce, 145 per 10,000, did they steal them from the US?

How can Israel steal 7 of the world’s best scientific research universities from the US?

The implication in your question:

how much of that high powered technology did your Zionist genius friends steal from the US

is just an admission that Israel is an advanced technological society.

Y’all aint learned nufin’ over these past few years. Y’all coulda better used yer time studyin’ fer that danged GED test bubba!

Actually, Ronnie, quite a few of those Jewish scientific geniuses migrated to Israel from the former Soviet Union, where Jews were the leading scientific workers of the former workers paradise. (I guess that proves that Communism is good for science. At least, that is what Robert Oppenheimer, Albert Einstein, Steve Nelson/Mesharosh, Theodre Hall/Hertzberg and all those other Jewish physicist geniuses who studied at Karl Marx’s tippy-toes thought, too.) These scientific socialist Jews found that stealing American nuclear technology was easier than developing it back in the lab back home in Moscow. I wonder why.

As for Fang, he has his brain on backwards, as usual. He never has anything interesting to say either, other than imputing to me his fascination with ten year old assholes.

http://www.amazon.com/Spy-Trade-Israels-Undermines-Americas/dp/0976443716

So Israel steals “none” of its technology, does it? Is that so, Ronnie? Bullshit.

http://www.davidduke.com/general/israeli-economy-for-beginners_22644.html#more-22644

Read from one of your own, Ronnie, on the glories of the Zionist economy. Kosher crime sure pays.

I’m sorry, did you just say that Oppenheimer stole American nuclear technology?

Is that what you just said?

Man it’s a good thing you don’t know how to breed.

Actually, Ronnie, quite a few of those Jewish scientific geniuses migrated to Israel from the former Soviet Union…

Great, and thanks for disproving your own “myth” about Israel not being an advanced technological society

Nice work goober!

Mr. Dimwit:

Oppenheimer was a Jewish Communist working for the Soviet Union, as recent disclosures from the former Soviet archives have demonstrated. Instead of following the essential pont, you prefer to argue over whether he was American or Russian. How typically Talmudic.

Apparently you cannot detect saercasm when you read it, Ronnie. And you still have not addressed the point – If Jews are such geniuses, why do they have to steal what they cannot produce on their own from others? People who have the ability don’t need to steal other people’s ides, dumb shit.

http://www.davidduke.com/general/israeli-espionage-in-america-a-national-security-scandal_22677.html#more-22677

Gee, look who is running the show.

PROTOCOLS OF POLITE SPEECH

Cass Sunstein, the Jewish Marxist “constitutional law” professor who was appointed by Barack Obama as a sort of roving minister at large in the government bureaucracy, has recommended censoring “rumors” on the internet. A rumor, of course, is any verifiable fact which conflicts with the 09/11 story or any other official lie the government puts out. Commissar Sunstein opines that such “rumors” are unnecessarily agitating the populace. They instill distrust in the gullible and create anti-government sentiment. Such “rumors” must be suppressed. Or, at a minimum, those who spread such rumors must abide by a “fairness doctrine”. They must post official government rebuttals of their position so that the free thinking may have “both sides” of the issue.

Such novel concepts are what one would expect from a great Jewish mind. Alan Dershowitz style intellects proliferate. But wait. Such concepts have a strangely familiar sound. Did not an alleged Zionist forgery advocate a similar procedure? Do not the mysterious “Protocols of Zion” recommend shutting the press down at the right moment? Do they not say that the excuse given shall be that the public mind is being agitated unnecessarily? Why indeed, they say precisely that. Does Cass Sunstein speak as the “great thinker” he undoubtedly is, or does he speak as a well-trained lackey of a more sinister force? Cass Sunstein would undoubtedly pooh-pooh such considerations as ridiculously conspiratorial. Like hordes of other Jews who earn their appointments to high government positions, Cass Sunstein belongs to the “Brotherhood of the Blood”. (It is not run by Glenn Ford.) The College of Mount Zion exercises no secret subterranean influence on government policy. Uncanny resemblances are coincidental. Only anti-Semitic little old ladies preaching to Nero Wolfe pedigreed TV talk hosts believe otherwise. THE

Cass Sunstein represents no brotherhood and frightens only middle class housewives fearful of losing respectability. The “Protocols of Polite Speech” are his only agenda, Rosemary.

THE POALE-ZION OF BOLSHEVIK RUSSIA

“National Communism” would be a strange term to American ears. Yet, as Baruch Gurevitz shows in his book, “National Communism in the Soviet Union, 1918-1928”, it was the concept that integrated Poale-Zion (the World-Wide Union of Jewish Workers) with the Soviet Union and its Bolshevik leadership. The Poale-Zion exemplified the efforts of the Bolsheviks to integrate Zionism and the concepts of Jewish nationality with the ideals of the Communist revolution. Zionism was, as Lenin had argued, inherently incompatible with Marxism. Marxism was to integrate the Jews with other workers and thus abolish the “paper nationality” of Jewry. Moreover, Zionism was a reactionary bourgeois ideology. But the practical reality was that Poale-Zion represented a huge mass of Jews all over the world who wanted international recognition of the “right” of the Jews to immigrate to Palestine and set up a Soviet Republic there. This “right” the Bolsheviks would never concede for the obvious reason that it would threaten the authority of the Bolshevik state. Neither could the Bolsheviks ignore the strong Zionist sentiments of large numbers of Jewish Communists.

The Jewish Section of the Party, the Evsektsiia, was therefore put in charge of pushing Poale-Zion toward Communist universalism as far as possible, while simultaneously indulging Zionism as a somewhat acceptable offshoot of Marxism. Poale-Zion split into its right and left wings in 1920, with the right advocating Democratic Socialism and the left wing continuing to espouse world revolution. Poale-Zion had the interesting idea that a socialist Palestine should exist in federated form with Jews from various countries having their own “national autonomy” (Russian, German, Polish, etc.) within the framework of a Palestinian-Soviet state. This was remarkably similar to the evolving nationalities system in Soviet Russia where the various minorities in the former Czarist Empire were organized in similar fashion. Thus, there were the Ukrainian Socialist Republic, the Belorussian Socialist Republic, etc. Poale-Zion was greatly feared by the British Mandatory Government in Palestine, who were aware of the Poale-Zion influence among the Jewish immigrants to Palestine. Poale-Zion also had a formal relationship with the British Socialist Labor Party and thus, influence within the government and the Colonial Office in London.

Poale-Zion also had strong links to the other rapidly coalescing revolutionary parties in Bolshevik Russia. It was on friendly terms with the Sejmists of the Jewish Socialist Workers Party (the S.E.R.P. of Chaim Zhitlovsky) which merged with the Zionist-Socialist Workers Party in May 1917 to form the United Jewish Socialist Workers Party. These parties were not as overt as the Poale-Zion in demanding a Jewish workers state in Palestine but were broadly sympathetic to its goals. As Gurevitz shows in his study, the Communist state up to 1928 was lukewarmedly sympathetic to Zionist aspirations. Zionism was officially heresy but heresy within the framework of a generally Marxist approach. Thus, the Evsektsiia and the heavily Jewish Communist bureaucracy could accommodate Poale-Zion, up to a point. Zionist projects could not override Communist ones but could be tolerated so long as they did not conflict with Bolshevism. Zionists living in the Communist agricultural colonies in the Crimea could visit mandatory Palestine and return. The relationship between Poale-Zion and the Communist Third International (the Comintern) was a complex one. Without going into the complexities of the various splits, the essential resolution was that the Comintern would use Pale-Zion to spread Bolshevik propaganda among the Palestinian workers (Arabs and Jews alike) while rejecting Poale-Zion’s demands for a Jewish state in Palestine.

The collapse of Poale-Zion in the Soviet Union was closely linked to the rise of Joseph Stalin and his plans for a Jewish Autonomous Region (JAR) in Siberia called Birobidzhan. Poale-Zion did, of course, support the idea of Jewish nationhood but rejected Birobidzhan because it would only be a homeland for the Jews of the Soviet Union, not of the world. (In the event, this proved to be not entirely accurate. Large numbers of Jews in America and Canada, fired by the idea, did migrate to Birobidzhan.) In 1928, upon the proclamation of the Birobidzhan scheme by the rising General Secretary of the Party, Joseph Stalin, the Soviet branch of Poale-Zion was shut down. Zionism, in any of its forms, was now unacceptable in the Communist paradise. Poale-Zion continued to exist in neighboring Poland, in England and America. But its existence as a viable political movement was over. Its membership served mainly as a reminder of the Marxist background of Zionism. That background was hardly irrelevant, as the subsequent migration of hundreds of thousands of Jewish Communists through the Balkans, 1945-1948, was to demonstrate.

And you still have not addressed the point

The point you made was Israel’s reputation as an advanced technological society was a myth. Not surprisingly, you were wrong.

And quit trying to hide your mistakes by burying them under multiple, long, irrational, jew hating comments that are off the topic of Israel being a technologically advanced country.

Ronnie Dumb Shit:

A country that gets its ideas through stealing them is not technologically advanced, period.

And as for “burying the point”. The sentence denying Israel’s reputation as an “advanced, technological society ” apeared within the context of an essay on Ayn Rand/Alice Rosenbaum. You employed your usual debating technique of trying to find an isolated sentence to quarrel with rather than refuting the essay as a whole. So the whole “issue”, as you term it, only became an issue at all because you want to make something out of nothing. It’s tather like your nonsense of dealing with an essay on the post-WW1 partion of Arabia by yapping endlessly on the location of a port. Or trying to refute my essay on the history of Zionism by arguing over whether Theodore Herzl wrote “Jewish problem” or something equivalent.

You’re a bullshit man, Ronnie. And since your Khazar ass loves Israel so much, why don’t you go live there, permanently? After all, those Jewish geniuses created a paradise in the desert by building over the Arab villages already there – after God’s Chosen demolished them.

The “lengthy, irrational, Jew hating essays” to which you refer are nothing more than the documented truth that all the charges that Jews routinely deny are nothing more than the documented facts, as proven by their reference works. It must really gripe your ass that I can prove you, and every other Jew, a liar so easily.

Keep on screaming.

You employed your usual debating technique of trying to find an isolated sentence to quarrel with rather than refuting the essay as a whole

I don’t pick out isolated sentences to quarrel with, I just highlight the glaring mistakes of facts that I know enough about off the top of my head to comment on.

Facts btw anyone with half a brain would know hehehehe except maybe a dumb racist jew-hater like you of course. Then again, ascribing to you half a brain may be too generous!

Your dumb essays are always based on lies, half-truths, misrepresentations and faulty sources – like radio islam, stormfront, david duck etc. – that the sum of its parts destroys the whole.

Now go study for yer GED dummy

Ronnie Turkey Shit:

You could not pass a course in third grade logic – you are much too stupid. My essays are based soley and exclusively on what Jewish scholars admit in their own reference works; they are not based on Stormfont, Radio Islam and other sources I never use (and before you reference my “Fraud of Zionism” essay posted on Radio Islam, it is my original creation to be found on many other websites as well). You can argue all you want about whether your fellow kikes are technological genuises or whether they are just good at copying from America, stealing from us or whatever. But when it comes to refuting my analysis of Poale-Zion, my studies of Mr.Vladimir Jabotinsky or my heavy documentation of Jewish involvement in Communism, you are as silent as your fellow asshole brain, Joseph Welch, who had nothing further to say when I plastered him with one documented quote after another from Jonathan Frankel’s “Dark Times, Dire Consequences: Jews and Communism”. He slunk silently away. Unfortunately, you are too dumb to know when to shut up.

Allright you turd shit, cocksucking little kike. We are going to have a little fun. Here is, once again, the essay with which I taunted Mr. Joseph Welch. Now the gauntlet is thrown down for you. You will have to address the facts. You do not get to bullshit about whether the Wezmann Scientific Institute is located in Jerusalem or Tel Aviv or whether the the southwest or souteast wing of the King David Hotel was blown off or when the income tax was passed or any of the other obiter dicta irrelevancies by which you habitually seek to confuse issues. No, you little penis faced Khazar limp dick. You have to rebut the essay with something logical, minimum two pages in length, typed, with appropriate references to prove me wrong. That is the “Professor Thames” test – and I guarantee you right now that you are going to flunk, you yeshiva school scumbag.

LECTURER OF TRUTH

A Mr. Joseph Welch of Counterknowledge.com has frequently accused this writer of distorting historical facts, in particular of falsely describing Communism as a Jewish movement. He accuses this writer of lacking proper academic credentials and of not having his writings subjected to “peer review. He then concludes that the Jewish Communist charge is bogus and that those who advocate it are intellectual charlatans, not to be listened to. Mr. Welch is inordinately proud of his own credentials as a university lecturer. He therefore reasons that he possess a wisdom above that of those who merely reason from facts to sustainable conclusions. Thus, Joseph Welch flies the PhD. of stupidity as the flag of his own invincible ignorance.

When this writer posted excerpts from a State Department document entitled “The Power and Aims of International Jewry” Mr. Welch’s response was to deny the authenticity of the document. At the same time he was denouncing this writer for failure to do archival research, he was supremely unaware of an actual archival document bearing on the very topic he was denying, the connection of Jews with Communism. Homer Lea once wrote a book, “The Valor of Ignorance”. He was hardly thinking of Joseph Welch, although the appellation could hardly be better placed. Just to show how incredibly ignorant and uninformed Joseph Welch is, we shall quote in extenso from a volume entitled “Dark Times, Dire Consequences: Jews and Communism”, edited by Jonathan Frankel and Dan Diner and published in 2004 by Oxford University Press as part of the “Studies in Contemporary Jewry” series. This volume contains a wealth of information on just how deep and world wide the Jewish connection with Communism once was. We shall begin with the introduction on pp. 9-10.

“Beyond these questions involving empirical historiography, there remains the ethical issue of collective responsibility. Given that, at some times and in some places, Jews were disproportionately involved in the massive crimes committed by the Communist regimes in Europe (emphasis added), did they in the process morally ‘contaminate’ the Jewish people as a whole? Did they act solely as individuals whose origins happened to be Jewish or was there a linkage, however construable, between their Jewish extraction, their Communism, and their participation in atrocities?”

“If, for no other reason, this question cannot be avoided because the argument is so often made in Eastern Europe today (in Poland and Lithuania, for example) that the large number of Jews within the Soviet security agencies who took a leading role in the years 1939-1941 both in the deportation of hundreds of thousands of innocent victims to the deadly Siberian labor camps and in numerous executions – and, by so doing, opened the way to acts of vengeance visited on the Jewish people by their Gentile neighbors from the moment the Red Army was forced back by the Wehrmacht. If, for example, the entire Polish people is to be held in some way responsible for the Jedwabne massacre carried out by Polish villagers, does it follow that the Jewish people should share in the guilt incurred by the murderous acts of Jewish NKVD/MVD operatives?”

Let us examine these paragraphs closely. They admit the basic fact denied by university lecturer Joseph Welch. Jews were disproportionately involved in Communism – and there is indeed an issue of Jewish collective guilt. This is admitted by two world class Jewish scholars – but denied by their intellectual superior – university lecturer Joseph Welch. Now let us proceed to various choice quotations that document the Jewish involvement Joseph Welch denies. In his essay, “Jews and the Communist Movement in Interwar Poland” Jaff Schatz of the Institute for Jewish Culture, Lund writes, pp.20-21:

“As previously suggested, throughout the interwar period, Jews did constitute one important segment of the Communist movement. According to both Polish sources and Western estimates, the proportion of the Jews in the KPP was never lower than 22 per cent countrywide, reaching a peak of 35 per cent (in 1930). According to some available data, the level of Jewish members of the Communist movement then dropped to no more than 24 per cent for the remainder of the decade. Other data, however, indicate that Jewish involvement actually went up in the large cities; in Warsaw, for example, Jewish membership rose from 44 per cent in 1930 to more than 65 per cent in 1937. In the semi-autonomous KPZU and KPZB, the percentage of Jewish members was similar to that in the KKP. The number and proportion of Jewish members in the youth movements was even higher, ranging from 31 per cent to a high of 51 per cent.”

“Working on the assumption that Polish Jewish Communists constituted between a quarter and a third of the Communist movement during the 1930’s, the total of Polish Jewish Communists (including youth group members but excluding political prisoners) ranged between 5,000 and 8,400. If prisoners are included, the numbers range between 6,200 and 10,000. In addition, Jews comprised the overwhelming majority of the legal front organizations, the Polish-based International Organization for Help to the Revolutionaries (MOPR)…which collected money for and channeled assistance to imprisoned Communists. In 1932, out of 6,000 members of the MOPR, about 90% were Jews.”

“Perhaps even more significant was the Jewish representation among the Communist leadership. Although party authorities consciously strove to promote classically proletarian and ethnically Polish members to become leaders and party functionaries, Jews accounted for 54 per cent of the field leadership of the KPP in 1935 and 75 per cent of the party’s technika – those responsible for producing and distributing propaganda materials. Communists of Jewish origin also organized a majority of the seats on the Central Committees of both the…KPRP and the KPP.”

Here, once again, we have a clear factual rebuttal of university lecturer Joseph Welch, who trumpets his credentials to the world while ignoring readily available secondary source literature which proves him wrong. Mr. Welch needs less peer review and more old fashioned objectivity to temper his thinking. Now let us examine what Istvan Deak says in his essay “Jews and Communism: The Hungarian Case”. On p.38 he writes:

“Jews, or rather, persons of Jewish origin but not of the Jewish religious persuasion, occupied decisive positions in the Hungarian Communist Party and, in general, the Hungarian socialist movement. Moreover, because the Communist party was in power in Hungary for 133 days in 1919 and again, roughly, from 1947 to 1989, it is no exaggeration to say that political personalities of Jewish origin played a decisive role in 20th-century Hungary.”

“To take matters a step further, one can state with confidence that Jews held a near monopoly of political power in Hungary during the 133 days of the Soviet republic in 1919 and again from, roughly, 1947 to 1955, and then again from 1955 to the fall of 1956. Because nowhere else in Europe did persons of Jewish origin ever share in such large numbers in similar long-term dictatorial power, it is clear that Hungary’s was a unique situation…”

“The truth was that it was of very great consequence from the point of view of Hungarian, Jewish and Communist history that Bela Kun and the dozens of others people’s commissars who dominated the Hungarian republic of Soviets in 1919 were of Jewish origin. Or as an American historian has put it: ‘The Jews were highly visible in the revolutions of Russia and Germany; in Hungary, they seemed omnipresent.’”

Thus, Joseph Welch is condemned as an ignoramus on the basis of Jewish admissions alone. What sort of university lecturer is it who has not consulted the most basic of facts while trumpeting his “wisdom” to his students? Turning now to Gennady Estraikh’s essay, “The Yiddish Language Communist Press” we read on p.66:

“In the 1920’s and 1930’s, millions of people, including a considerable number of Jews outside of Russia, revered Moscow as the future capital of a just and democratic civilization. Yiddish Communism formed a distinct subculture in the international Communist movement, being overseen, in one way or another, by the apparatus of the Comintern, the Communist International…regardless of their country of domicile, the Communists of East European vintage represented a relatively homogeneous group of people who were devoted to the Soviet Union – that faraway proletarian fatherland…Through the blur of distance, time, and utopian expectations, the Soviet Union became a dream land of freedom and equality. Many Jewish Communists went so far as to regard themselves as ‘Soviet foreigners’, to borrow a term provided by Hirsh Bloshtein, an Argentinian and later Soviet Yiddish poet.”

And what says Joseph Welch to these amazing admissions of international Jewish sympathy for Bolshevism? Why, he doesn’t. In his mind, Jewish admissions of guilt equal “Nazi propaganda”.

In his essay “The Moscow State Yiddish Theater as a Cultural and Political Phenomenon” Jeffrey Veidlinger writes:

“Soon after the revolution of 1917, the Communist Party in Russia realized that in order to create a base of support among the non-Russian minority nations, it would need to encourage the communication of Soviet ideals in local languages and discourses. Thus, Bolshevik thinkers and activists created Communist literary unions, films, and theaters in the languages of the minority nations. The hope was that these institutions would provide effective Communist education, such that national distinctions and aspirations would eventually be replaced by a supranational class consciousness. It was in this context that the Communist party, and particularly its ‘Jewish section’, (Evsektsiia), supported the establishment and promotion of Yiddish theater. The Evsektsiia believed that theater, with its mass appeal and revolutionary associations could reach working-class Jews in a way that no other medium could.” (p.84)

Ezra Mendelsohn provides further evidence of the Jewish involvement in revolutionary art in his essay “Jews, Communism, and Art in Interwar America”. He writes:

“All this provides ample evidence for the existence of large numbers of left-wing Jewish artists in interwar America. The substantial Jewish presence on the left was, of course, nothing new – Jews had been prominent in the European and American socialist movements before the First World War and in the wake of the Russian Revolution, many had joined the Communist movement. During the 1920’s, the American Yiddish-language Communist daily newspaper, Di Frayhayt (later Morgen frayhayt) had a larger readership than did the English language equivalent, The Daily Worker, while at least one third of the members of the Central Committee of the party were Jews.” (p.100)

At least three prominent Communist cartoonists of the Depression era were Jews, Louis Lozowick, William Gropper and Hugo Gellert. Mendelsohn concludes his essay with the following amazing words:

“…the alliance of some Jews with Communism has much to tell us about a central dilemma in modern Jewish life: that of finding one’s way between the utopian, messianic, and often dangerous urge to change the world, on the one hand, and the natural wish to identify with one’s own people, with its sufferings and achievements, on the other. Whether or not they explicitly acknowledged it, American Jewish artists’ choice in favor of the former alternative was, at least in some ways, a Jewish choice.” (p.127)

As always, the erudite Joseph Welch, confronted with these and similar damning admissions on the Counterknowledge.com debate site, has nothing to offer by way of rebuttal. He can only snarl about lack of peer review and published articles (publication in The Nationalist Times obviously does not count). It would be idle to continue quoting from “Dark Times, Dire Consequences”. If the above does not suffice to convince, further quotations would hardly reinforce the already established. “Dark Times, Dire Consequences” is only one of dozens of research volumes establishing the truth of Jewish Communism beyond any reasonable doubt. Joseph Welch, a minor figure on campus, is of no consequence himself. But he is an all too typical example of the intellectual corruption of the academy. As a lecturer, he is entrusted with the education of the students. Yet he cannot even educate himself on a suppressed truth he dare not face. Mr. Welch’s intellectual cowardice on the dread subject of Jews and Communism typifies the intellectual cowardice of the professors who employ him. These professors also quail before the reality of Jewish Communism, just as they run in terror from technologically impossible “gas chambers”, a kangaroo court at Nuremberg and six million “lost and found”. Recently a major university in Canada was threatened with the loss of a large yearly donation by a Jew irate over a little objective examination of the state of Israel’s odious policies. The university quickly back tracked. That is the reality of intellectual freedom on campus. The brave and intrepid seekers after truth on campus, secure in their ivory towers, know who signs their paychecks. They may insult the values of their students and their parents, but they bow down before Zion. That is why, like Joseph Welch, they deny the most firmly established facts to be found in their own reference volumes, while genuflecting before missing ashes.

AN INTERESTING COMPARISON

Students of things Jewish will recall that when Baruch Goldstein shot down over forty Arabs at prayer in a mosque Jews in both Israel and the U.S. called him “the sweetest Jew who ever lived”. They opined that he did not kill enough Arabs actually, but “it was a good start”. Learned rabbis proclaimed that “a thousand dead Arabs were not worth a live Jews fingernail”. Goldstein’s admirers built a shrine to him in Israel with an eternal flame. Jews continue to worship there daily. Curiously, none of these Jews, then or now, were prosecuted for “hate speech” or “incitement to violence”. But, lo and behold, when an Australian man tells a Jew in public to fuck himself, that man is hauled into court and convicted for “promoting hatred” against an ethnic group. He gets a three year jail citizen.

Observe, then. The Chosen People can maim and murder with impunity. Those who merely talk back to the Chosen People get jail time.

LEGAL WARFARE

Jewish lawyers are very innovative. At Nuremburg they concocted the novel theory of “criminal organizations”. Now they have concocted the innovative theory of “financing terrorism”. How does this concept work? The Jews first sue because some Jew on a boat got assassinated by a Hamas terrorist. They target the Palestinian Authority or some other Arab entity as an alleged or actual financier of the terrorist. Then, when they have a verdict, they freeze the assets of the Arab organization in the U.S. and use those to pay off the plaintiff. Now, anyone who can think can see that this innovative procedure could very obviously be used against the Jews the same way. Jewish organizations send millions of tax free dollars overseas to Israel to fund Jewish settlements and bulldoze Arabs into the rubble. Can Arab plaintiffs therefore sue the Jewish organizations and collect against their assets the same way? Of course not. Clever legal theories are instruments of political war fare and are to be applied only against one’s enemies, not one’s friends.

Besides, were such legal concepts applied to the past Jews would really be in trouble. After all, Jews in the 1940’s were shipping all kinds of munitions and armaments illegally to Palestine to murder British officials, policemen and soldiers. Surely the surviving relatives of these Zionist atrocities should be allowed to sue and to freeze the assets of the Jews in America who financed, aided and abetted these atrocities and collect too. But that would never do. The Talmud teaches that there should be one law for the Jew and another law for the gentile. What is good for the goose is not good for the gander. That is basic Zionist logic. The Palestinian Authority must pay for liquidating Florida Chosen Ones; Menachem Begin, Yitzhak Shamir, Nathan Yellin-Mor and others shall never have to petition the American Jewish Committee, the Jewish Agency for Palestine and the World Zionist Organization to hold them harmless and indemnify them for their well-documented crimes.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2003/dec/24/israel1

I wonder what all the Jew “diversity” propagandists in the U.S. think of this? Tsk, tsk.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vsDJ3YivBSA&feature=player_embedded

Here is your great, fucking “democracy”, Ronnie Schmuck. Let’s hope that you get it the same way.

FALSEHOOD IN HISTORY

A Jewess shyster has sued ex-president Jimmy Carter over his book, “Palestine: Peace, Not Apartheid”, alleging that it defames Israel with false and misleading information. The suit is grounded on a New York State Consumer Protection statute which is designed to protect consumers from deceptive advertising and misleading products. The suit is merit less on its face. The statute is designed to protect the public from fraudulent commerce, not historical debate. Whether “Palestine: Peace, Not Apartheid” contains erroneous facts or errors of interpretation is not relevant. All sorts of historical and political books contain errors of fact and interpretation. No one has hitherto suggested that the judiciary should be an overseer of historical truth. Were this Jewess serious about historical truth, she would have done better to sue Miss Joan Peters over her notorious historical fraud, “From Time Immemorial”. Or she might have sued the New York Times over the outrageous prevarications of Walter Duranty on the Ukrainian famine.

The Jewess shyster is clearly culpable of abuse of process. She is misusing the legal system to promote Zionist political objectives. She will not be fined or disbarred. Her Jewish friends shall see to that. But the fact that a Chosen lawyer can even attempt such a maneuver is indicative of just how far the Jews have come in their takeover of America. In 1950’s or 1960’s America no lawyer, especially a Jewish one, would ever have dared to sue an American ex-president, especially over a difference of political opinion. The implied warning to Americans is: “Do not dare oppose us. If we can sue an ex-president for criticizing Israel, guess what we can do to you.”

THE DEAD DREAM OF ZIONISM

Every day it becomes more evident that the original Jewish objections to Zionism were correct. Jews are more loyal to Israel than they are to the United States and the land of their births. One need merely look at men like representatives Eric Cantor and Steve Cohen to know this. They devote more energy to representing Israel than they do representing their constituents. Cantor and Cohen are by no means unique. Tom Lantos, Brad Sherman, Nina Lowey and many others do the same thing. When the Balfour Declaration was first proposed, Lucien Wolf, Edwin Montagu, and many other prominent English Jews denounced the declaration in the most vehement terms as tainting the Jews of the United Kingdom with dual loyalty. The Jews have come a long way since that original unease. Now they can claim, with a straight face, that Israel’s interests and America’s interests are the same – and anyone who suggests otherwise is an anti-Semite.

The original Zionists were very careful to pretend that they were not going to dispossess and expel the indigenous Arab population of Palestine. They disavowed any desire to create a Jewish state – and spoke only of a desire to create a Jewish “national home” in which both Arabs and Jews would have equal rights. Now these Zionists proclaim that the state that they were never going to create has an inalienable “right” to exist. The Arabs expelled in 1948 continue to languish in miserable U.N. refugee camps across the Jordan river – or barely subsist in the vast open air prison of Gaza. The Jews who objected to a “Judenfrei” Germany do everything in their power to create an “Arab-free” Israel. They continue to build on confiscated Arab land and to expand Zionist lebensraum at every opportunity. They treat Arabs as second class citizens as they continue to wail over the persecution of Jews throughout the centuries.

The English Jews who objected to Zionism in Lord Balfour’s time were concerned that it would violate the rights of the Arab population of Palestine and put the Jews in the role of aggressors against the native Palestinian population. Sine that charge has been fulfilled to the letter, present day Jews attempt to invert the truth by screaming about suicide bombers. In the Zionist state Jews practice the Nazism they denounced in the Germans. They impose roadblocks, deny equal rights to housing and land leasing and generally attempt to ghettoize the Arabs the same way that Jews were once ghettoized in Europe. Zionist Israel is a tribute to massive Jewish hypocrisy.

Before the creation of Israel, Jews could hide behind the Jewish persecution myth. But Israel has destroyed that myth. Israel has shown the Jew, not as persecuted, but as the persecutor. Israel has also shown Jews as the true force in international politics. Israel gets what it wants from the United States because Jewish money controls the politicians. Israel is the proof that Zionism rules the world of politics. As the original opponents of the Balfour declaration feared, Zionism has become the anti-Semites dream and the Jews nightmare. The Jews shall not abandon their Zionist dream, even as it pulls them toward the abyss. The wiser ones see what is coming but their protests shall fall on the deaf ears of their leaders. Zionism shall devastate the Middle East and pull down the Jews of the Diaspora with them.

HOLIDAY IN THEIR HEARTS

New York Herald Tribune
May 1, 2010

Dear Sirs:

Every time the Arab suicide bombers of Palestine blow up an Israeli official or splatter Israeli diners with their meals, the anti-Semites of America make a little holiday in their hearts. Not all the anti-Semites, of course. Some anti-Semites continue to believe that there are both good Jews and bad Jews, and that the bad Jews can be reformed. These anti-Semites read Freud, not facts. The anti-Semites to whom we refer survived the Jewish commissars. These are the anti-Semites who helped Hitler and the Nazis shoot Jews. These anti-Semites are John Demjanjuk clones who wish, after their torture and travail in Zionist staged kangaroo courtrooms, that they really had committed the crimes with which they were charged. These are the anti-Semites who have had their careers and livelihoods destroyed by speaking like Jimmy Carter. These anti-Semites, who have suffered under the heel of Zion, rejoice whenever the survivors of non-existent “gas chambers” suffer their personal Deir Yasseins.

Throughout the centuries, the Jews have had a free shot at all those who tell the truth about them. But no more. Holocaust Denial is rising; the Middle East is rising; the Arabs of Palestine are rising. The anti-Semites are only making a little holiday in their hearts at present. But they may be making a bonfire at much bigger political rallies before long.

By Ben Himmler,

Hollywood’s Foremost Screenwriter

“WE SHALL HATE OR WE SHALL FAIL”

The present war against the Zionists is proof that 1948 was a failure. Had the Wicked Kaiser of the Kike-Reich been hanged then, we would not be fighting today. The spiked helmets of Imperial Zionist Culture would have been replaced by the goose stepping “Heil Herzl” bastards of today, but their objectives are the same – first the Middle East and then the world! Professor Sperry has aptly warned us of the Zionist Octopus. The tentacles of AIPAC are everywhere. Zionist traitors like Joseph Lieberman, Charles Shumer, Eric Cantor, Steve Cohen, Brad Sherman and Nina Lowy sit in the House and Senate. Their Zimmerman telegrams to Nicholas Sarkoczy stir up rebellion against white America. Like the Lusitania of yore these evil Zionists kidnap relief ships and execute passengers in cold blood. They attack American intelligence ships and pretend that they made a mistake. (Like the Star Spangled Banner, the “rockets red glare” made positive identification impossible.)

Bagels, like sauerkraut, undermine American culture and values. Zionists in Hollywood make blondes bend over to satisfy their perverted lusts. (“They saw, they conquered, they came”, proclaimed Israel Caesar.) This is the fate that awaits you, fellow Americans, if the Zionist-Fascists triumph. Therefore, to save your country, as the Arabs once tried to save Palestine, “you must hate Jews and all that they stand for, or you will fail.” You must hate, for in the Zionist Jew there exists no good. The Jew of Imperial Zionism is the beast unleashed. He is a murdering, raping, Jack-The-Ripper lunatic. Remember what he did to handless Belgian babies at Deir Yassein. The Hun of Imperial Zionism once hunted Arabs in the Holy Land; now he hunts Americans. He wants to transform the “land of the free and the home of the brave” into a Gaza for whites. Americans shall become the beasts of the field, “hewers of wood and drawers of water”, to serve him.

“You must hate or you will fail”, ladies and gentlemen. There must be no compromise with the sign of the beast. He wears the insignia of 6-6-6 – and he is coming for you.

Rex Stout
A Nero Wolfe Historical Parody

A FLAG WAS BORN – BY BEN PROPAGANDIST

In 1948, a flag was born in Palestine. It was really the hammer and sickle in Palestine but it advertised itself as the Stars and Stripes. Yes, in Palestine in 1948, the Pilgrim Fathers of Zionism created a new land in the wilderness, exactly as the pilgrims created their “New England” in America. Naturally, there was an enemy to be overcome and it was the same in both cases – the British. The “Brutish” were oppressing those “Swamp Fox” Zionist freedom fighters named the Irgun, the Haganah and the Stern gang. The British were actually hanging freedom fighters whose only crimes were to blow up British trains, dynamite hotels, assassinate British officials and lob explosives into crowds of civilians.

Lord Cornwallis/Field Marshall Bernard Law Montgomery was forced to flee back to London. Mel Gibson type Zionists ambushed English soldiers at every opportunity. Why, Ben Hecht actually applauded Mel’s dead eye musket as he drew the bead on one English Nazi after another. The Zionists breached the barricades at Gaza as the Egyptian Pashas surrendered. A flag was born as the Arab Indians evacuated their villages and fled into the Jordanian desert. The old Hickories of Zionist colonialism, like Ariel Sharon and Moishe Dayan, stood proud. They had butchered the Redskin savages at Deir Yassein. The Ram’s horns of the Zionist cavalry blared in triumph.

And so a flag was born. The American goyim had no idea what had really happened – and do not until this day. They listen to the stirring strains of “Exodus” – and learn their history at the feet of the Hollywood moguls.

“ALL QUIET ON THE FRAULEIN’S RUMP

Students of the World War One era shall recall Erich Maria Remarque’s classic anti-war novel on the insane slaughter of the First World War. But just to show that nothing ever changes – and to show that those who forget the past are condemned to repeat it – we now have the stirring feminist novel of women at war – “All Quiet on the Fraulein’s Rump” by Erika Marie Cunt. Like the youthful schoolboys of 1914, the feminists think that war is a great adventure. Inspired by Joan of Arc, they imagine themselves to be mighty warriors, capable of defeating Roman legions even as they collapse hysterically into the arms of the drill sergeants who are “sexually harassing” them. These women die by the thousands in the “no man’s land” of Afghanistan. They are brutally mass raped by Taliban savages and die with their breasts hacked off in the mountain passes. They discover that war is not about pinched tits and groped buttocks. Their shrieks of horror are drowned out by the latest media cacophony about drunken Navy Dinner Parties. As the mutilated feminist lies dead on the battlefield with a cartridge casing on her blood stained posterior, all is indeed “quiet on the Fraulein’s rump”.

Well, well, total silence. Two pecker heads with two inch dicks between their ears have nothing to say. We may be sure that Ronnie prick is searching frantically for a sentence or two he can play with. (Hey! I’ve got it! I compared the attack on the Turkish refugee ship with the sinking of the Lusitania. But we all know that the Lusitania sank but the Turkish relief ship didn’t. Therefore, John Thames is a liar, a falsifier of historical data and a charlatan! Way to go, Ronnie, I’m always happy to help out.)

As for poor, stupid Fang, he is probably taking instant history for dummies right now and consulting his crib notes to figure out who Rex Stout and Ben Hecht were, not to mention reading up on some of their inflammatory writings. (We all know how Fangbeer spends his life in the research library.) Tood-a-loo, asshole heads. I smoked you again.

A CASE DEMONSTRATION OF A CERTAIN CONNECTION

The old Poale-Zion of Czarist Russia wanted a Jewish Marxist state in Arab Palestine. Did they succeed? Theoretically no but to a large practical extent yes, they did succeed. Ben-Gurion, the first Prime Minister of Israel and its founding father, was a member of Poale-Zion. When the Poale Zion split in 1920 into democratic right wing and revolutionary left wing factions, Ben-Gurion aligned with the right. His efforts were compounded when the Soviet Union formally banned Zionism in 1922, although Poale-Zion was allowed to function until 1928. Ben-Gurion organized the Ahdut Ha-Avodah, an amalgam of Poale-Zion and several other Zionist parties. That was the foundation of Zionism in the early 1920’s and it all flowed from Poale-Zion.

Poale-Zion was Marxist-Socialist to the core. Its chief theoretician was Dov “Ber” Borochov, the author of “The National Question and the Class Struggle”. His thesis was that the Jewish proletariat must rise in Palestine rather than Russia because of the usual Marxist clap trap about alleged “historical necessities”. Borochov returned to Russia from Palestine after the revolution and organized Jewish “Red Brigades” to fight for Trotsky’s Red Army. Both Ben-Gurion and his friend Ben-Zvi were thoroughly versed in Borochov’s teachings. It should be obvious, then, that Poale-Zion had a major influence both on Zionism’s “George Wahington” but also on the early formation of the Zionist pre-state. Thus, once again, the very deep connection between Zionism in Palestine and Jewish Marxism in Russia is demonstrated.

WHEN DID COMMUNISM BECOME ANTI-SEMITIC?

As students of the subject know, pre-World War Two Communism in Russia was largely Jewish. But now Communism in Russia is generally regarded as an anti-Jewish, anti-Zionist movement. When did this change occur and what, generally speaking, caused the shift? The basic change came in the late 1940’s/early 1950’s when the Jewish revolutionary parties of pre-1917 were finally shut down. It must be realized that by no means all of the Jewish Marxists of the late Czarist era were members of the Communist Russian Social Democratic Labor Party. The vast majority were split among the other radical Jewish parties, most of which were either Zionist-Marxist and/or Territorialist/Jewish autonomous. These Jews were largely incorporated into Communist Party after the October 1917 revolution. But their Nationalist/Zionist predilections clashed with assimilation, the Party’s formal solution to the age-old “Jewish question”. The Party attempted to deal with this problem through various methods, among them the use of the Evsektsiia, the Jewish Section, to integrate them into the Party, lectures against Zionism and conversion of Jewish religious tales to a Communist format to preach the Communist message.

Nevertheless, the problem remained that large numbers of Communist Jews were also Zionist Jews. The Party could not afford to alienate such a large based of pro-Bolshevik sympathy and thus had to play its cards carefully. Accordingly, the Party allowed Poale-Zion, the world-wide union of the Jewish Workers, to exist until 1928 because, as a Marxist-Zionist political party, it could be used to placate the Zionist sympathies of Russian Jewry without repudiating Communism. By 1928 Joseph Stalin, the former Nationalities Commissar, conceived the idea of setting up a Jewish Autonomous Region in Siberia called Birobidzhan. Once the Birobidzhan scheme commenced, Zionism was officially dead in Soviet Russia.

From this point on the old Jewish duality of Marxism-Zionism in Stalinist Russia was essentially finished. The Jewish stranglehold on the commissariats continued until the early 1950’s, especially in the Iron Curtain countries of Eastern Europe. But one of the big reasons for the liquidation of the formerly omnipresent Jewish power was the Soviet fear of divided loyalties. This fear became particularly acute after the creation of the state of Israel in 1948. Standard histories of the Soviet Union cannot explain the Soviet turn against the Jews in the early 1950’s for two reasons:

(1) They do not want to acknowledge the formerly dominant Jewish role in the Soviet Union;

(2) They do not want to discuss the very complicated intertwining of Marxist-Zionist politics, 1880-1917, because of the implications of these facts for the background of the state of Israel.

This is the fundamental explanation for the reluctance of the historians to discuss the Marxist-Zionist connection, as well as the fundamental explanation for the move of Communist Russia against the Jews when they had formerly been the dominant force in Communism. It is not hard to understand but the relevant historical background lies deeply buried.

Communism in Russia is generally regarded as an anti-Jewish, anti-Zionist movement. When did this change occur and what, generally speaking, caused the shift? The basic change came in the late 1940’s/early 1950’s when the Jewish revolutionary parties of pre-1917 were finally shut down.

Your knowledge of Communism in Russia is retarded. Lenin and the Bolsheviks attacked all the jewish and zionist parties as nationalists from the beginning. In 1903 the Bolsheviks removed the Bund from the party coalition, banned the teaching of Hebrew, closed down the Zionist parties, and arrested and killed thousands of their members in 1919 and 1920, including members of Poalei Tziyon. Any group which advertised a separate national culture was considered an enemy of the proletariat.

Accordingly, the Party allowed Poale-Zion, the world-wide union of the Jewish Workers, to exist until 1928

The party never allowed Poalei Tziyon to freely exist, but hounded them to extinction. The last congress of Poalei Tziyon in Russia took place in 1917. Poalei Tziyon split and disbanded in 1922. The remaining Russian members of Poalei Tziyon hobbled along under constant threat until 1928, when they were killed by the NKVD.

the reluctance of the historians to discuss the Marxist-Zionist connection . . . the relevant historical background lies deeply buried.

To a dummy like you maybe. To everyone else in the world Russian communist history is widely known, and freely available.

Ronnie:

Your knowledge of Communism is on a par with your understanding of non-existent “gas chambers”. I suggest you get a copy of “National Communism in the Soviet union, 1918-1928″ by Baruch Gurevitz and actually read it, pecker head. The Communists always denounced Zionism as heresy but were, practically speaking, willing to tolerate it, up to a point, because so many Jewish Communists were also Zionists. This all came to a head in the 1928-1929 period when Birobidzhzn was in the process of being set up. Also, the Party denounced the 1929 Wailing Wall riots in Palestine, taking the side of the Arabs and thereby alienating the Zionist members of the heavily Jewish Communist Party.

You can read all about it in Melech Epstein’s, “The Jew and Communism” published about 1958. You can also read the Chapter entitled “The Struggle With Lenin” in Nora Levin’s “While Messiah Tarried”. You are, for once. right about the split in 1903 where the Bolsheviks expelled the Bund over Jewish territorialism. That was the issue Stalin tried to resolve with the Birobidzhan project.

Now let’s read the rebuttal to Joseph Welch about which you remain deadly silent. You can recite your lines while sucking off a camel. It should improve your diction.

And one other thing, Ronnieschmuck. It is, and always was, Jewish Communism – as I’ve proved a thousand times over.

…It is, and always was, Jewish Communism – as I’ve proved a thousand times over

Weren’t you the dope who said this the other day:

Communism . . . is generally regarded as . . . anti-Jewish . . . When did this change occur . . . The basic change came in the late 1940’s/early 1950’s…

It’s never too late to get yourself a GED goober!

James still in desperate need of pussy I see.

Pascal thinks that pussy is historical debate. Poor Pascal.

Ronnie, the Talmudic nitpicker, “thinks” he has discovered a contradiction. He hasn’t. I’ve never varied from the position that Communism was Jewish dominated until 1950. So what is new?

I’ve never varied from the position that Communism was Jewish dominated until 1950

Except when you haven’t:

it is, and always was, Jewish Communism

Quit making a fool of yourself on this old post, and study for that GED already dummy.

Stop the silly dialectics, Ronnie Scum. You’ve lost the argument on Jews and Communism a thousand times over – just like you lost the debate on “gas chambers” and “six million” a thousand times over.

Now do us all a favor and drop dead.

http://200yearstogether.wordpress.com/2010/12/11/chapter-19-in-the-1930s/

Now here is one for that kosher dialectician, Fang. Let’s watch him write on how Solzhenitsyn is distorting the facts on Jews and Communism in the 1930’s U.S.S.R. As always, John Thames is “making it up”.

So I get it from Donald Duck.com do I? Not quite.

http://www.vho.org/tr/2004/3/Strauss342-351.html

James, James there is no historical debate. Just your ravings which indicate that you suffer from PDS or pussy deprivation syndrome.

Now ehy don’t you be a good boy and take out 1000 dollars from your bank account and get some pussy.

You are quite right, Pascal. There is indeed no debate – as I’ve already proved. Pussy is your problem, not mine.

CLOSE THE DOOR AT ALL COSTS

When people have the Nazi “gas chamber’ hoax explained to them their usual response is to ask: Why? There are three basic reasons. The first is to provide Jewry with both a sword and a shield. Whenever the Jews are criticized they can hide behind their hoax. Anyone who objects to their disproportionate power and subversive influence can be dismissed as a “Nazi!” who wants to exterminate them a second time. The second reason was to provide a rationale and a cover for the creation of the Jewish state in Palestine. Because the Germans had supposedly exterminated six million Jews, therefore the survivors should be given a place of refuge to compensate them. (Of course, the Arabs had nothing to do with the supposed extermination. And “rescuing Jews” had never been an objective of Zionism. But those are subjects in themselves.) The Germans could then be blackmailed into paying reparations forever for an extermination that never took place. A third, and largely forgotten reason, was to cover up the Jewish Communist charge. By manufacturing a hoax of their own supposed extermination, the Jews could cover up their own murder of millions in Soviet Russia.

The “gas chamber” hoax, then, has been extremely useful to the Jews. But it also represents a real danger to them if the truth is ever exposed. Bluntly stated, if the truth ever comes out, the fake extermination shall be replaced by a real extermination. This is the reason the Jews have forced the politicians to pass laws making it a criminal offense to “deny the Holocaust”. These laws exist all over Europe and Canada. These laws are a tribute to the power of the Jews. The “gas chamber” story is not merely false, it is a veil for an evil power controlling the world. In a sense, it is “The Mother of All Lies”. It is the clearest possible proof of a Jewish international conspiracy.

In short, if the “gas chamber” hoax is exposed a great door is opened into a vast vault of historical secrets. The door must be kept closed, at all costs.

MUZZLE MOUTH ANTISEMITISM

The cases of actor Charlie Sheen and French fashion designer John Galliano are sending an ominous message to all the rich and successful of the glitterati –criticize Jews at your peril. Charlie Sheen did nothing more than identify his producer by name as a Jew. The remaining episodes of his show were cancelled and Charlie was placed on probation. Galliano allegedly praised Hitler and his alleged massacre of Jews at a bar. He was promptly arrested for violating French anti-racial incitement laws. Clearly, speaking out against Jews in allegedly free societies can be very hazardous.

But no such restrictions apply to Jews. Let us take the clearest possible illustration. Twenty years ago Baruch Goldstein from New York gunned down over forty Arabs at prayer in a mosque. His fellow Jews referred to him as “the sweetest Jew who ever lived”. They said that he had not killed enough Arabs actually but he had made a “good start”. They even proclaimed that “a thousand dead Arabs were not worth a live Jews fingernail”. No one, then or now, suggested that these Jews should be prosecuted for “hate speech”. Jews in Israel built an eternal flame shrine to Goldstein where thousands of Jews worship annually. No one demands that this “memorial to hatred” be torn down. Yet men who merely make token anti-Jewish comments are castigated in the media and dragged before law courts. The disparity is both shocking and ominous.

Jews are being very, very stupid. They think that non-Jews do not notice these things. But if people in highly paid positions who depend on Jewish employers are now willing to speak out despite the personal risks involved, then a great reaction against Jewish power must be building. Attempting to damn it by putting muzzles over people’s mouths will only make it much worse.

Twenty years ago Baruch Goldstein from New York gunned down over forty Arabs at prayer in a mosque. His fellow Jews referred to him as “the sweetest Jew who ever lived”. . . No one demands that this “memorial to hatred” be torn down.

1. The murders by Goldstein took place in 1994, which is 17 years ago not “20.”

2. Goldstein murdered 29 people not “over forty.”

3. The murders took place at the Cave of the Patriarch’s Isaac Hall. It is the second most holy site for jews. The crusaders turned it into a church, the Mamelukes turned it into a mosque forbidding jews and christians from worshipping there. It is run by the Palestinian Authority and the Muslim Waqf which still prohibits jews from accessing parts of it.

4. The Israeli government condemned the massacre, and arrested Kahane followers.

5. Goldstein was immediately denounced with shocked horror.

6. Most in Israel classify Goldstein as insane. Jews have been allowed to worship there since the Six-Day War, always armed because it is in Hebron, and there never have been weapons been used by Jews against Moslems before or after that event. The same cannot be said for weapons used by Moslems against Jews and Christians there or around the middle east in general.

7. Kahane supporters established a memorial to Goldstein at his gravesite after the murders.

8. Israel passed a law prohibiting monuments to terrorists.

9. In 1999, the IDF bulldozed the Goldstein memorial.

Charlie Sheen did nothing more than identify his producer by name as a Jew

Charlie Sheen is a crackhead, and his show was cancelled because he is suffering from the classic, cocaine-induced psychotic disorders with delusions.

The cases of actor Charlie Sheen and French fashion designer John Galliano are sending an ominous message to all the rich and successful of the glitterati –criticize Jews at your peril. Charlie Sheen did nothing more than identify his producer by name as a Jew.

Yes, Charlie Sheen, that icon of self control, did nothing more then a boat load of coke, get convicted for assault, challenge his boss to a fight, and demand a 50% raise.

The guy’s a drug addicted asshole who beats hookers and thinks his fame grants him elite human status. No wonder John defends him.

Ronnie and Fang are their usual bullshit selves. “The murders took place “Seventeen years ago, not twenty”; it was really” 29 dead, not forty” (and what about the wounded, asshole?). Oh wow, really important details, right Ronnie? Of course, his fellow Jews condemned him. Did they really? Why the silence about all those juicy documented statements by all those Jews who condemned what he did? Bullshit, bullshit and more bullshit.

Oh yes, and Fangstupid. Charlie Sheen has been doing dope for years with no ill effects on his behavior. Ditto with making it with hookers.. What got him canned was mentioning that his producer was a kike hiding behind an alias. That – and nothing else – did it.

Jews have been committing Deir Yassein type slaughters for the past sixty years. Goldstein was only too typical.

And where is the refutation of Solzhenitsyn, o turd shits? Is Ronnie going to accuse him of copying it from Donald Duck.com?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Baruch_Goldstein

Hey, Ronnie Lie Shit:

Note how in 2010 Psycho-Kikes were dressing up as Goldstein and praising his deeds to their children. Jews are really sorry about what he did – because you say so, prick.

http://lalqila.wordpress.com/2010/05/28/pre-partition-wanted-posters-of-the-palestine-police-force-includes-terrorists-like-menahem-begin-and-yitshak-shamir/

Here are some juicy photos of future prime ministers of Israel who thought they were above British law. Learn some facts, Fangstupid.

Charlie Sheen has been doing dope for years with no ill effects on his behavior.

John Thames. Such a fine judge of character. Who wouldn’t want a job with John though. Damn. You can take months off at a time for rehab. Threaten to fight your boss, beat women, come to work stoned, and demand more than double the highest salary in your field. Sounds like a good gig. So long as you don’t call your boss a Jew you’re golden.

On second thought, double the salary for “assistant jew hater” probably doesn’t amount to a hell of a lot in the market to begin with. But hey, talking to John is like a historical acid trip so there’s a benefit, right?

Oh wow, really important details, right Ronnie?

*Yes, really important facts you got wrong again!

*More and more proof that you’re wrong on the facts all the time. for any reader careless enough to stumble onto this old post.

*Your constant, repeated mistakes are what make the John Thames Turkey Shoot such a fun diversion.

*Your sloppy reasoning – which are based on your invented facts, and just plain wrong facts – are that much more amusing to read!

*You are my favorite poster-boy for irrational jew hatred, keep up the good work!

and go study for the GED you dummy

Ronnie Stupid Shit is a scholar of the footnotes.

Ronnie thinks that if every detail of every account is not 100% accurate, that that disproves the main point (which Ronnie always ignores or gets completely wrong). Let’s give dumb fuck Ronnie a lesson in concepts called weight, relevance and obiter dicta. (Ditto for Fang Shit who is equally stupid.) Relevance means: What has it to do with the subject? The issue here is that Jews made incredibly bigoted, incendiary remarks after a mass murder by one of their own. They were not prosecuted for hate speech. Mr. Galliano does and gets nailed. The double standard is striking. Ronnie ignores the point and says: “Aha! It was only 29 dead, not 40.” Ronnie ignores the relevance.

Next, Ronnnie ignores weight of the evidence. Not merely does the number of dead not mitigate the evil of Goldstein’s mass murder, it does not lessen the hypocrisy of the Jews who reserve for themselves the hate speech they deny to others. These simple observations are ignored by Ronnie, while he quibbles over figures. Finally, we come to the concept called obiter dicta. If a debate is taking place on a given subject, then a comment on a side matter, accurate or not, does not disprove the main point under consideration. It is like a judge’s personal comments in a criminal case that do not bear directly on the verdict. Those comments on not legally binding and are not case law for future use. They are not precedent.

The relevant questions here are:

(1)Why do Jews have the right to make bigoted comments but not non-Jews?

(2)Why does anyone have an obligation to love Jews as the price of a job?

Since Ronnie and Fang cannot address the two relevant questions, I get every form of insult and nonsense under the sun but the relevant considerations are ignored, as always. Fang and Ronnie have specialized in lies, innuendo and false accusation ever since this debate began. I recall that Fang originally accused me of being Professor Kevin MacDonald in disguise. When that lie collapsed, next I was accused of copying and pasting other people’s essays when in fact they were my own essays. Ronnie keeps alleging that I get my information from Stormfront and Donald Duck.com when in fact I get it straight out of Jewish reference volumes and world renowned authors like the late Alexander Solzhenitsyn.

Anyone who looks at this debate knows that my essays are cogent and well informed. Anyone who looks at the postings of Ronnie and Fang will find nothing but defamatory statements, personal attacks, carping among the footnotes, and a deliberate unwillingness to address the real issues. The difference speaks for itself.

Speaking of sex with the underaged, Fang Stupid, I did not write these passages.

http://www.come-and-hear.com/editor/america_2.html

Ronnie thinks that if every detail of every account is not 100% accurate, that that disproves the main point

No, ronnie just thinks you’re dimwit whose facts are always wrong

Hey, Ronnie, you lying little shit. Were all those facts that Solzhenitsyn posted about Jews and Communism wrong? Nothing to say yet, Ronnie? And any comment yet about weight, relevance and obiter dicta? Did you forget to read that, Ronnie? Or are you still too stupid to understand?

When double standards are tolerated, it is because people are afraid of the power of those imposing the double standards. That is why Jews can say “A thousand dead Arabs are not wortha live Jews fingernail” and get away with it but a John Galliano who says that “Hitler should have fucking gassed all the Jew”s gets it. It is called sucking Jew cock as the price of your pay check.

In view of Charlie Sheen and John Galliano, more pertinent than ever.

JEWISH COMMISSARS OF “FREE SPEECH”

When Oliver Stone made the comment that Hitler and Stalin needed to be put in “historical context” the Israeli billionaire and Hollywood film producer, Haim Saban, went ballistic. He was further outraged by the additional comments of Mr. Stone that Hitler did more damage to the Russians than the Jews and that Israel’s media lobby distorts the facts on the Middle East. Saban opined that henceforth Oliver Stone should be allowed to practice his Fifth Amendment rights in retirement. What Haim Saban was really saying was that Jews should be allowed to define the limits of free speech and intellectual inquiry – upon pain of career destruction.

Mr. Saban would undoubtedly argue that the First Amendment only protects citizens from government retaliation, not private retaliation. That is technically correct. However, Haim Saban must surely realize that, historically, Jews have provoked pogroms and expulsions through their anti-social behavior. Among the abuses which the Jews have committed are attempting to stifle criticism of their behavior and to suppress historical interpretations which they deem detrimental to their group interests. A good example of this process was the enormous pressure that was put on former President Jimmy Carter over the publication of his book “Palestine: Peace, Not Apartheid”. Another example was the forced resignation of Marge Schott as the owner of the Cincinnati Reds for her qualified praise of Adolf Hitler. Now Oliver Stone, himself half-Jewish, is getting the “Mel Gibson” treatment.

Haim Saban is unwittingly laying the groundwork for a rising tide of anti-Semitism. People do not care to be told what they can think and how they may express themselves. They particularly do not like to be dictated to as the price of a paycheck. Perhaps these minor considerations do not occur to the arrogant Mr. Saban. But to the man-in-the-street, certain considerations will flow through his mind. He will conclude that if one cannot criticize Jews, then Jews must be the real rulers of these United States. He will conclude that Jews are throwing their weight around and that maybe that evil man, Adolf Hitler, was on to something. He may even consider that the state of Israel is harming U.S. interests in the Middle East – and that super rich Jews like Haim Saban and their campaign contributions – are one of the reasons for U.S. support of Israel. He may even conclude that enforced silence is one of the big reasons for these abuses – and that perhaps those who enforce silence should themselves be silenced.

These are dangerous thoughts indeed – and they lead to reactions well documented in history. Oliver Stone is quite correct that Hitler and Stalin need to be discussed in context. But to raise that context would perturb Haim Saban immensely. It would raise all the forgotten historical facts that he does not want examined. To put Hitler in context would mean recalling the injustices of the Treaty of Versailles and the immense Jewish involvement in same. It would mean remembering the names of the Communist revolutionaries in Germany and Hungary after the Great War – almost all of them Jewish. It would mean remembering all the Jewish commissars who served Joseph Stalin in the 1930’s and 1940’s – before he got around to purging them. It would mean examining Joseph Stalin’s attack plans in 1941 – before Hitler beat him to the punch. No doubt the context of all these matters would even disturb Mr. Stone and some of his mistaken notions. But that is what freedom of speech and intellectual controversy is all about – rocking the boat.

It is blindingly obvious that there is a de facto Jewish approved religion of thought in these United States. This approved religion becomes ever more blatant in its efforts to crush freedom of thought and dissent. The issue is not one of bigotry and intolerance, for what is bigotry to one man is truth to another. Jewish Commissars of “free speech” like Haim Saban should no more be tolerated in these United States than the Jewish gulag commissars of 1930’s Russia should be allowed to die quietly of natural causes in their Moscow apartments.

Haim Saban must learn that “freedom of speech” does not mean the freedom to fellate Haim Saban as the price of Hollywood fame and fortune. The House Un-American Activities Committee once rooted Jewish Communists out of the movie industry. It is time to root ethnic bully boys out of Hollywood, so that both Oliver Stone and Mel Gibson, men of surely diverse viewpoints, can have their say without fear of retaliation.

CRIMES AGAINST THE DISARMED TRUTH

A standard feature of war crimes trials is the charge that the defeated enemy abused captured soldiers. It was a charge leveled at the Confederacy in the Civil War; the same charge was leveled at the Germans during the war in Soviet Russia. In all cases, the food and supply problems inherent in every war, and the behavior of the victorious armies in aggravating the food and supply situation, are deliberately ignored. Thus, in the German-Russian war, the behavior of the Red Army in scorching the earth, destroying crops and carting off livestock to hinder the advancing Wehrmacht, is deemed irrelevant to the starvation of millions of Soviet POW’s in German hands. Similarly, the starvation of Jews in the German labor camps at war’s end had nothing to do with the collapse of the German supply and transport systems, the constant bombing and strafing of the allied air forces or the overcrowding of the German camps as refugees poured in from the east.

It was very much analogous to the execution of the Confederate camp commander, Wirth, at the infamous Andersonville camp for Union prisoners. Wirtz was accused of deliberating starving the soldiers, of denying them clothing, shelter, housing and sanitation. The fact that supply inadequacies made it impossible for Wirth to do any of these things was deliberately ignored by the Union prosecutors. Equally ignored was the behavior of the Union armies in scorching the earth, erasing villages from the map, burning farms and confiscating grain and livestock. It was all Wirtz’s fault. The “barbaric South” had proved its inherent evil. The northern newspapers had a field day with its exposes of Southern mistreatment of Yankee POW’s. Gruesome photos were featured on the front pages. The fact that the North was doing the same things to its prisoners with far less justification was ignored ( the North had the food and supplies; the South did not). Similarly, the Germans were blamed for the deaths in their internment camps while the hundreds of thousands of Germans deliberately starved by Dwight Eisenhower after the war are still officially denied by court historians.

The trial of camp commander Wirtz was a travesty of justice, just like the trials of the German camp commanders. Realities were ignored and the guilt of the accused was assumed in advance. Exculpatory evidence was disregarded and conviction was required for propaganda purposes. Andersonville and Nuremberg were ropes for the falsely accused in their day; now they are ropes around the necks of historical falsifiers.

All kinds of Hollywood actors have drug and behavior problems. Need I mention Lindsay Lohan? But they don’t get driven out of Hollywood or subjected to black lists because of it. Briitany Murphy kicked off a couple of years ago because of constant misuse of drugs. She was idolized by the media upon her passing. But the slightest anti-Semitic comment will finish a Hollywood or fashion industry career instantly. Mr. Mozzarella Meatball Head, otherwise known as Fangstupid, ignores the real point and tries to argue that John Thames has Charlie’s drug problem. Of course, this is the same lying SOB who tried to argue that yours truly was really Kevin MacDonald in disguise, a fact which in no way diminishes his zero credibility.

Ronnie thinks that if every detail of every account is not 100% accurate, that that disproves the main point

Am I the only one enjoying the irony here?

Ronnnie ignores weight of the evidence. Not merely does the number of dead not mitigate the evil of … mass murder

Come on.

This is.

I can’t even.

I don’t.

Sheesh, John. This has to be the single most gob smackingly idiotic line of argument for you to take.

Ever.

You’re really going to argue that your errors are meaningless in context, but we’re supposed to ignore the mass slaughter of millions of Jews because you think there might be some hidden documents in Russia that dispute the actual figures?

You’re going to argue that?

I.

I just don’t know about you John.

I recall that Fang originally accused me of being Professor Kevin MacDonald in disguise.

You have the memory of a Alzheimer’s patient. A dead Alzheimer’s patient. It wasn’t me. Good work Mr. Historian. You can’t even research something that happened to YOU on a website that has the exact conversation for everyone to read. (I found the post you’re talking about in under 10 seconds.) Awesome job.

Joseph Welch said
on 21 April 2009

I’ve found out a bit more about Mr Thames’ champion, Kevin MacDonald. He’s a real charmer:

http://www.splcenter.org/intel/news/item.jsp?aid=252&site_area=1&printable=1
http://www.splcenter.org/blog/2008/10/03/academic-senate-condemns-professor-kevin-macdonald%E2%80%99s-anti-semitic-research/

Perhaps ‘Mr Thames’ is Professor MacDonald under a pseudonym? It would explain a lot.

He,y Mozzarella Meatball Head:

You have no evidence whatever that millions of Jews were murdered by “gassing” or any other method. You simply assume it as a fact, “proven” by bogus testimonies at a kangaroo court. Very impressive. This debate has been going on forever and you still cannot grasp the essential point.

I note that you are as silent as your sidekick about Solzhenitsyn’s very damning documentation on the Jewish Communist connection that you deny. And you still ignore the point about Sheen and the French fashion designer – Jews can make the most blatantly racist statements and get away with it but their critics cannot . As for Joseph Welch making the false accusation rather than you, the false claim was still made by your side, wasn’t it?

And, oh yeah, the non-issue about lesser numbers not justifying mass murder. The Arabs at prayer did nothing to deserve it; the Jews who created Communism surely did. More profundities for your stupid shit brain to ponder.

Kevin Macdonald provokes the same response that I do – his critics cannot argue the facts; they argue alleged bias instead – just like you two shit heads.

Dear Fangstupid:

In re “strict accuracy”: Was it not your side-kick, Joseph Welch, who denied the authenticity of that State department document, “The Power and Aims of International Jewry” that I got out of the National Archives? And was he not just as silent as you when I proved that it was authentic? How come you impose this “strict accuracy” requirement on me but not your side?

And moreover: When are you and Mr. Credentials going to post the rebuttal to the dozen or more scholarly quotations I posted verbatim (and whose accuracy you have not contested)? Are you too lazy to do the typing? Or are you having trouble disproving the facts again?

FUCK YOU, SMILING ASSHOLE FACE.

You have no evidence whatever that millions of Jews were murdered by “gassing” or any other method.

You admitted to the einsatzgruppen murders. Your compatriot David Irving admitted to the Chelmno gas van murders.

11 Q. [Mr Rampton] No, Mr Irving, you see, that is only part of what you have maintained. What you have consistently maintained, so far as I am aware, until perhaps we got some concession in this court yesterday, what you have also maintained is Jews were not killed by the use of homicidal gas?

16 A. [Mr Irving] Oh, I disagree. I have repeatedly allowed that they were killed in gas vans.

That seems like evidence to me. What more evidence do I need other then your own admission?

John, remind me who it was that said this:

Today, all this has been forgotten, particularly by stupid shits like Mr. Welch who never learned the facts in the first place. As to the Einzatsgruppen, I never denied that a lot of Jews were shot. I said the kill total was somewhere between 100,00-1,000,000.

The Arabs at prayer did nothing to deserve it; the Jews who created Communism surely did

Your contention is that each of the Jews that the Nazis shot created communism?

You think that 10,000 to 1,000,000 people created communism?
What a dumb thing to think.

Were all those facts that Solzhenitsyn posted about Jews and Communism wrong?

Probably, but I didn’t read his posts or yours. Solzhenitsyn did no first hand research, and relied almost exclusively on encyclopedias. Relying almost exclusively on encyclopedias is what D-grade high school students do.

Encyclopedias are not used for academic research because they are not free of their own agendas. For example, anyone who wrote a history of Russia, and relied exclusively on The Great Soviet Encyclopedia would not be taken seriously.

Worse, a number of historians examined Solzhenitsyn’s citations to the three encyclopedias he relied on, and found numerous instances where he intentionally omitted, and distorted the sources.

You would need a GED for me to explain Solzhenitsyn further, so go study!

Sillyjisms are Fang’s method of reasoning

The fact is that Jews did create Communism and staffed it in overwhelming profusion for over thirty years. Fang attempts to equate this undeniable fact with the numbers of Jews shot on the Eastern front. The idiocy of the reasoning speaks for itself . As to David Irving, he speaks out of both sides of his mouth on the extermination story. I never considered his views definitive, merely sometimes useful.

The number of Jews killed by the Einzatzgruppen is wildly exaggerated. As for the innocent versus guilty Jews, soldiers fighting wars tend not to make such distinctions, as idiot sophist Fang surely knows.

From this point on I’m going to argue using nothing but John’s own quotes.

The number of Jews killed by the Einzatzgruppen is wildly exaggerated.

[John Thames] ignores weight of the evidence. Not merely does the number of dead not mitigate the evil of … mass murder… I said the kill total was somewhere between 100,00-1,000,000.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MEhkwK4VDTM

I wonder what the boys will say about this one?

As usual, Fangstupid cannot argue facts; he can only argue what his infantile mind imagines to be a contradiction. In the instant case, Mr. Shit-For-Brain confuses the purely factual question of how many Jews the Germans actually killed with the presumed (not proven) mass murder the Germans supposedly committed. Thus, he not merely assumes facts not in evidence; he confuses the moral with the factual. What a terminal fucking idiot.

In the instant case, Mr. Shit-For-Brain confuses the purely factual question of how many Jews the Germans actually killed with the presumed (not proven) mass murder the Germans supposedly committed.

john thames said
on 16 April 2009

There is an abundance of evidence for an “ethnic cleansing” progam.

There is evidence that approximately one to two million Jews perished of all causes during the war

john thames said
on 2 April 2009

Now for the claims of mass executions on the Eastern Front. This claim is partially true.

Watch out, John. It looks like John has you cornered. After all, if the claims of Einzatsgruppen executions are even partially true you’re going to have to explain to yourself why the “number of dead” [does] “not mitigate the evil of … mass murder”

I know what I wrote. Care to explain why the Germans were prosecuting their own soldiers for abusing Jews at the same time the Germans were supposedly exterminating them?

What do Geneva Convention sanctioned executions of partisans engaging in illegal warfare have to do with mass murder, o enlightened shit head?

The liars go silent. It is obvious why.

Care to explain why the Germans were prosecuting their own soldiers for abusing Jews at the same time the Germans were supposedly exterminating them?

john thames said
on 9 April 2009

Going along with the hoax helped to divert attention from tha much greater crimes

What do Geneva Convention sanctioned executions of partisans engaging in illegal warfare have to do with mass murder

john thames said
on 2 April 2009

The true number of Jews killed in World War 2 is between one to two million. That is a lot

And the point is?

john thames said
on 15 February 2011

The answer’s clear to anyone who isn’t a complete idiot.

I have news for you. Finding what you “think” are contradictions (they aren’t) is not going to make your case; neither will quoting the Nuremberg trials.

john thames said
on 11 January 2011

As to the facts, you have no case and never did.

john thames said
on 7 April 2009

The debate is more or less over. The other side has lost on all counts.

The side that won doesn’t need to debate. Instead they choose to prod the loser with a virtual stick.

What are you still doing here John?

And who decided that you won?

Angelo and a lot of others thought that I took you to the cleaners (I did.) Now take your ugly meatball face to the plastic surgeon and get a redo.

And who decided that you won?

Sane people.

By your own proclamation – and nothing more.

Ladies and Gentlemen, as to the caliber of those in dissent I give you exhibit : hanoverfist. Trippetta to John’s Hopfrog!

Of course, on my side I have the consensus of the majority of the westernized world.

But if you want to believe that’s due to the power of my own proclamation then so be it.

Dear FangStupid:

Once upon a time the consensus of the entire planet was that the earth was flat and that the sun revolved around the earth. So much for the consensus of opinion as a test of truth. And, as every schoolboy remembers, Galilleo Gallilee had the consensus of the Catholic Church against him.

Great argument, shit-for-brain. Do better.

Once upon a time 12 year old girls were of breeding age, women knew their place, and the son was responsible for the sins of the father.

I’d be careful with accusations of subscribing to outdated tautology if I were you, John. Your positions put you in the stone age of truth.

“We live in the best of all possible worlds.” So sayeth Fang the genius. In this best of all possible worlds, doubting the indisputable truth of the Holy Hoax is a go to jail offense in many countries. This is the man who parades himself as an apostle of progress, while repudiating freedom of thought and inquiry on his favorite subject.

I am most impressd. It is nice to know that this terminal idiot has finally acknowledged that for many centuries 12 year old girls were, indeed, of legal breeding age. It takes Fang a long time to catch up with facts. As for feminism, it is hardly anything new. If Fang would study the history of the Roman Empire, he would discover that the Romans had a big feminist movement, similar in many ways to the feminist movement of today, that screwed things up back then the same way that feminism is screwing things up today.

“Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it.” No better proof can be found than in the “mind” of Fang The Stupid.

Speaking of the “Stone Age”, o wise one. If I understand the state of Israel, the argument for its existence is: “The ancient Jews occupied Palestine for a brief period of time two to three thousand years ago; this entitles them to a state in the modern world. Forget that the Arabs have been living there for centuries; kick them out based on ancient history.”

Now there is real Sone Age reasoning – subscribed to by you.

Those things that you put in your post around the passage “We live in the best of all possible worlds” are called quotes. A quote is a citation of a passage created by some other author. In your quote you cite me as the author. You failed.

It seems to be a common theme for you with quotes, so I figured you needed the lesson.

while repudiating freedom of thought

There’s quite a difference between repudiating your freedom of thought, and repudiating your thoughts. At what point did I inhibit your ability to think what you think? How could someone possibly do such a thing? It’s not possible. Even your quack examples of Charlie Sheen and Helen Thomas do not illustrate examples of the repression of the freedom of thought. At most, they illustrate examples of the consequences of that freedom.

Just because you have the ability to think freely, that does not mean that others have to subsidize that thought, support it, or support your intent to distribute it. You can think whatever fucked up thing you want. I’ll still call you a idiot for thinking it. I’ll refuse to patronize your business, and I’ll advise others to do the same. After all, you don’t expect me to suspend my freedom so that you don’t have to realize any consequences for exercising yours.

finally acknowledged that for many centuries 12 year old girls were, indeed, of legal breeding age

I never did deny it. What I did do was mock you for thinking you could go to Spain and do it yourself. I did that because I’m disgusted by you for thinking that such an act would be acceptable, stone age philosophy not withstanding.

Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it.

And this is why you are so desperately intent to revise the reality of what happened to Jews in those concentration camps. It’s why you have to try and persuade people that such a thing never happened. It’s not because it never happened. It’s because you want to try that shit again. You said it yourself.

Of course, based on your performance here, I’m not all that concerned. The only people you persuade are psychopathic drug addicts like this guy:

http://patterico.com/2011/03/07/who-said-it-ahmadinejad-or-sheen/

As always, dear Fang, you illustrate your abysmal stupidity with every word that you write. It is your never ending theme. First, you obviously never heard of a paraphrase. A paraphrase is an approximation of what someone said, not an exact quote. i am under no obligation to look up the precise words of the quotes I use to satisfy your Emily Post requirements of debate. Besides, it does absolutely no good to give you exact quotes anyway, since when I do it, as in the case of the quotations from “Dark Times, Dire Consequences”, you offer no rebuttal (you don’t have one) anyway.

Next, the issue of freedom of expression. I’ve heard all the bullshit arguments about how other people don’t have to associate with people whose views they dislike. “You can say it but I can take away your job and livelihood in retaliation.” Uh-uh, asshole. If freedom of speech only protects dissidents from the government but not their employers, then there is no genuine freedom of seech – for the obvious reason that people will never say what they really believe if they can be financially ruined as a consequence. In fact, if you look at the First Amendment, it says that “Congress shall make no law…” It says nothing beyond that. Thus, a good argument could be made that State governments do have the right to restrict freedom of speech because the Constitution says only “Congress shall make no law…” Such are the consequences of legal sophistries.

Politically correct assholes like you have made a fetish of free speech for decades. Over and over, you and others apply free speech to campus punks running around with “Fuck you” written on their foreheads in the 1960’s, to protestors screaming “Pig!” at the cops, to pornography when the concept of free speech was only meant to apply to ideas, not expressions of the sexual act, etc. That kind of “free speech”, no matter how vulgar and obscene, is praiseworthy. But when it comes to offending the all-powerful kike lobby by exposing their holy hoax then, by golly, free speech means that the livelihoods of those who commit heresy shall be destroyed because God’s Chosen People and their sycophants, like you, should not have to associate with such horrible types.

You have such a noble, logically consistent mind, meatball face’. Now go suck a Jew cock as the price of your daily bread.

You are such an amazing bullshit artist, Fang. Freedom of speech is distinguishable from the consequences of exercising that freedom. What crap. You can say anything you like – if you are willing to be destroyed in the marketplace for doing so. What kind of “right” is it that cannot be freely exercised? That is like saying that you have the “right” to walk down the streets of Oakland or Detroit at night – except that you might be mugged or killed because the worthless cops cannot protect public safety from criminals. Make the exercise of a right prohibitively risky and the right exists on paper only – not in the real world. It is a simple point – and therefore completely beyond your comprehension.

HITLER WAS RIGHT – THE REAL MESSAGE OF CHARLIE SHEEN

Charlie Sheen was fired from his TV show because he made mildly anti-Semitic comments about his Jewish producer, Charles Lorre/Levine. Charlie probably compounded his problem by denouncing the 09/11 official story. Although Charlie did not say it that too, was impliedly anti-Semitic because everyone who has studied the subject knows that 09/11 was an inside job by the Jews. Now, if a man can no longer hold a job because he expresses anti-Jewish views, then Jews must be running things. That means, in plain English, that Adolf Hitler was right.

Consider: If you criticize the President, the Democrats or Republicans, you will not be fired from your job. You can be for or against abortion, you can oppose or support illegal immigration to the United States. You can even argue, like Patrick Buchanan, that American entry into World War Two was a mistake. You can argue, like Charles Murray, that blacks are less intelligent than whites and stay within the bounds of intellectual respectability. But suggest that Jews are less than loveable individuals? Why, that is the kiss of death! All over the world individuals are having their careers destroyed for criticizing Jews. They are even being thrown into jail for questioning Jewish historical orthodoxies, like the Holocaust Hoax or for offending Jewish sensibilities under various “racial incitement” statutes.

No one can look at this blatant suppression of anti-Jewish criticism and avoid the conclusion that Jewish power rules the globe. The Jew controlled media refuse to state the proposition this blatantly, of course. That might provoke resentment and reaction. But no thinking individual, looking at the facts, can avoid the inescapable conclusion.

Employers, Fang The Wise tells us, have the right to dismiss those who hold unacceptable views. Clearly, Fang The Wise is a defender of the German Nazis. The Nazis, as the employers of the German nation, rightly regarded the Jews as a dangerous, subversive element in German society. They were the carriers of Communism and Weimar degeneracy. Therefore the Nazis fired the Jews from their jobs as German citizens and told them to go elsewhere for work.

The Nazis were only doing what Fang reccomends doing. After all, the Germans had every right not to associate with those whose views and behaviors they despised, just as whites have the right not to associate with biologically inferior blacks with their ten times higher crime rate. Freedom of association means freedom not to associate too, so Fang The Wise naturally repudiates Brown v. Board of Education and all other Supreme Court decisions that impose mandatory mingling with those who Fang wishes to avoid. (To reason otherwise would be gross logical inconsistensy in a man who thinks he recognizes inconsistensy in others.)

Winning arguments with Fang is like taking candy from the proverbial baby. Along with his side kick Ronnie, he really is “that stupid”.

http://www.ihr.org/jhr/v18/v18n3p-4_Weber.html

Well, well, you lying cocksucker. Micro wave delousing machines at Auschwitz to save lives. Don’t bother with your usual mocking of the source – try explaining the facts. You can’t, turd shit.

They are called quotation marks, John. They are not called paraphrase marks. An example of a paraphrase is; John said that he would like to have sex with a 12 year old girl in Spain. An example of a quotation is, “But if the day ever comes for “Payback” you pink, circumsized piece of greasy pork, I, and millions of other whites who finally know the truth, will hunt you down and nail your kosher ass to a crucifix with your amputated balls stuffed between your circumsized lips. You deserve it, and so do millions of others of your satanic tribe.”

John, the reason why I don’t give a shit to go look up your obscure quotes from obscure books is that you can’t even get the book names right. The book is not called Dark Times, Dire Consequences. Remember when you kept insisting that Between the Flag and the Banner was really called, “Behind The Banner and the Flag?” You even did it after you linked to the damned Amazon page of the book. How dumb was that?

You did it again. Why would I think that you got a quote right, when you can’t even get the name of the book right? Why would I think you got the quote right, when you can’t even quote this thread correctly? John, you’re a clown that does nothing but spew mistakes, and they are really stupid mistakes.

What kind of “right” is it

It’s the kind of right that shall not be infringed upon by the government. I am not the government, John. I don’t have to treat your bullshit as equal. Just what is it that you’re saying anyway? Are you saying that someone needs to be forced to employee Charlie Sheen no matter what he says? Are you saying that a business owner has no right to terminate employees that offend customers? You haven’t thought this through all the way, have you John?

Therefore the Nazis fired the Jews from their jobs

What an ironic choice of words. They fired them in ovens, John. They murdered them and then threw their corpses in ovens.

You just cannot think can you, Fang? You have presented no evidence whatever that the Nazis killed any Jews in “gas chambers” and then threw them in ovens. You simply assume it as a fact and then treat your assumption as a given, in defiance of all the evidence to the contrary. This makes you both a liar and a fool.

As to opinions offending customers, you have presented no evidence that Charlie Sheen alienated any viewers of the show. Where is the ratings drop? (I suspect that firing Charlie Sheen and replacing him with another actor will offend a lot of viewers and cause a ratings drop. This is not about protecting ratings, idiot, it is about protecting the Jews.) Besides, all opinions offend someone. As to freedom of speech being protected only from the government, that leaves unpopular opinions subject to private retaliation which makes a mockery of any genuine freedom of speech. This obvious point you completely ignore – just as you ignore all the facts that prove the extermination of the Jews a hoax.

In case you had not noticed, Jews wield enormous economic power in all societies. This “power of the purse” allows them to use economic pressure to suppress opinions they do not like and to impose intellectual conformity to their agendas. If you think that is a healthy thing thing, once agan, you are a fool. (A point that requires no demonstration.) Your attempted refutation of my analogy with the Nazis was pathetic. The Germans refused to associate with people they did not like by depriving them of their livelihoods, just as you reccomend doing to anti-Semites and Holocaust Deniers. Vive la difference, shit-for-brain.

Your nonsense about Joe Kuharic style malapropisms are equally off the mark. Your pretense that transposing a word in a title or substituting one word for another invalidates my research is sheer pretense and an evasion. Likewise with the sneering reference to rare books. The real problem is that the reference works by Jewish scholars do say what I claim – and that is the point you do not wish to address. The use of quotation marks also has nothing to do with the issue – and you know it. I am not writing here for publication; I am only making fools of two idiots who have no knowledge of any of the subjects they discuss. I therefore do not intend to go throught the tecium of looking up quotes I have read many times. I merely recite the essence of the quotation from memory and leave it at that. When I do take the time and trouble to give the quotations verbatim from the hundreds of reference works I possess, it only provokes complete silence anyway. Your asshole sidekick, Joseph Welch, has, to this day, not responded to the quotations I posted from the Fraenkel and Diner book, “Dark Times” or to the provable State Department Report. Neither will you because your goddamned quotation marks will not do you a bit of good if the writings are seriously examined. If you were a witness in a court case, Fang, no judge would tolerate your semantics for ten minutes. You would be designated a “hostile witness” and forced to respond under threat of jail time. That would mean that I could stand there all day, week after week, reading documented quotations and then handing you the book to prove it. Or, better yet, I could force you read the quotations while you otherwise had to keep your mouth shut. You would have nothing left to say after I destroyed you.

Now to return to that outmoded definition of “free speech” only being protected from the government. If a supplier were to threaten to cut off a contract from his buyer because that buyer had an employee whose opinions offended the suplier, I would have the suppliers balls cut off and handed to him. You make a big fetish about protecting the citizen from government restrictions of free speech but you obviously have no problem with using the government to force employers to hire approved minorities or to force racial integration upon unwilling whites. Thus, you apparently think that government dictate is bad in the one case but good in the others. As I’ve said before, you are a fucking idiot Fang.

“It shall be a violation of this statute to fire any employee because of an unpopular opinion, whether privately expressed or expressed on the job. It shall also be a violation of this statute to blacklist or attempt to blacklist any employee because of an unpopular opinion, whether privately expressed or expressed on the job. It matters not whether the opinion is personal or political in nature; nor does it matter whether the opinion expressed is racist, sexist or within or outside of the political mainstream, however defined. It shall be no defense that the opinion expressed may drive away business or jeopardize business relationships.

It shall also be a violation of this statute for any third party, such as a supplier or distributor or any other participant in the chain of commerce, to attempt to have someone else’s employee terminated through the exercise of commercial bargaining power. This includes but is not limited to threatening to cut off contracts to coerce the termination of an employee, suggestions to competitors to cease doing business with the firm employing the offending employee, threats to raise prices if the offending employee is not terminated and all such similar techniques. It shall further be a violation of this statute to copperate with any government, quasi-governmental or private news gathering organization to enforce any such termination or boycott of any offending individual.

It is the intent of this statute to provide absolute protection from any private retaliation against an employee for expressing any opinion, no matter how deeply offensive or unpopular in any circumstances whatever, publicly or privately, on the company’s time or off, personal or political, racial or sexual. No exceptions are permitted, either by this statute or by any subsequent judicial interpretation.

http://incogman.net/the-real-holocaust-deal/

The Holocaust made so simple that even idiots like Fang and Ronnie Stupids can understand it.

“It shall be a violation of this statute to fire any employee because of an unpopular opinion”

This, like so much other glurge you post, is a complete fabrication; pulled directly from your ass. Imagine if such a stupid law was put in place. McDonalds would hire people to seek employment at Burger King and then pay them to express the opinion that McDonald’s is superior to Burger King. Once employed, Burger king couldn’t fire them. Such a law completely tramples the employer’s right to determine whether an employee is satisfactory.

What a moron you are, John.

you obviously have no problem with using the government to force employers to hire approved minorities or to force racial integration upon unwilling whites. Thus, you apparently think that government dictate is bad in the one case but good in the others. As I’ve said before, you are a fucking idiot Fang.

Where did I make this obvious, you dipwad? I don’t recall ever stating a position on affirmative action.

If you do not understand that economic coercion is being used to stifle people’s freedom of expression, you can’t understand anything else – such as the self evident fact that the six million are a hoax. An employee’s suitability for a job is determined by whether he can perform the job, not by any opinion the employer might not like.

As always, you are a fucking idiot.

As opposed to your assumptions (fabrications, actually) that I fantasize about making it with twelve year old girls? Or as opposed to Ronnie Fuck’s assumption that I need a high school diploma when I already have a Bachelor of Arts? You’ve made plenty of assumptions of your own, asshole.

As to “stupid laws” we already have some on the books making it a criminal offense to doubt the six million fiction. You should compare those laws with my propsal which would limit employers from taking away people’s livelihoods to suppress genuine articulation of unpopular views.

As always, your brain is a fucking turd.

As opposed to your assumptions (fabrications, actually) that I fantasize about making it with twelve year old girls?

I didn’t fabricate anything, John. I don’t have to assume. You said it yourself, many times in many different ways. Here’s a sample:

john thames said
on 12 October 2009
Screwing 12-13 year olds is nature’s design and historically acceptable practice. Those are the facts, like them or not.

and in response to Ron’s post:

ron said
on 23 October 2009

In fact, I think it would be poetic justice for a nazi child predator like yourself to share a jail cell with the orthodox jewish child abusers in that article.

You said:

john thames said
on 23 October 2009

As long as I engage in dissident thoughts rather than proscribed actions, I am not a criminal.

Ron accused you, and you said as long as I only think about it, I’m not a criminal. This is you admitting that you fantasize about having sex with minors.

I on the other hand have made no comments on the subject of affirmative action at all. Your assumption is a straw man that you invented in your head. Like so much other stuff that you post here such as invented book titles, invented quotes, and fictional historical events.

As to “stupid laws” we already have some on the books making it a criminal offense to doubt the six million fiction.

What law do “we” have on the books that make it a criminal offense to doubt anything? None. Yet another thing that you fabricated out of whole cloth.

An employee’s suitability for a job is determined by whether he can perform the job, not by any opinion the employer might not like.

An employer’s standard for suitability is determined by the employer. Not by you or your stupid fantasy law. You’ve confused your natural right to thought and free speech to some invented right of employment. No such right exists. God, John. You sound like a friggan communist with that law.

Are you?

Are you a Jew?

Mr. Bullshit:

If employers do not have the right to ask women whether they intend to make babies on the company’s time, and thereby disrupt the workplace, then why do they have the right to impose a thought crimes test?

I never said I was fantasising about 12 year old girls; I merely made the valid distinction between fantasising and acting. More bullshit. Quite a few countries in Europe do indeed have laws against questioning the six million story. Or hadn’t you noticed? Also, these same European countries also have laws against firing employees over political views. Or didn’t you know?

Now for a change of pace.

COLUMBIA BROADCASTING BUTTOCKS

The media are bleeding profusely for poor Lara Logan, who had her ass grabbed on the streets of Cairo. But, in between the screams of “sexual assault”, real victims of sexual assault go unnoticed. Afghani women, darlings of the media, have the centuries old habit of hacking off the genitals of wounded soldiers after a battle. Contrast this form of sexual assault with the fate of poor Miss Logan, who suffered the infinitely greater ordeal of having her breasts and buttocks stripped and fondled on the streets of Cairo. Miss Logan is fortunate that she is a woman. Her immaculate posterior is more worthy of protection than the anus of white males sodomized by blacks behind prison bars. She only had to suffer a few minutes of paws on her love cheeks, as opposed to bending over on a daily basis.

Let us not deny Lara Logan her dignity. She suffered minor abuse but abuse that does not even begin to equal those who suffer far more outside the carefully focused indignation of the media lens.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rKKr-bHxjIA

It compares very favorably with what Ronnie and Fang deny.

More proof that Ronnie and Fang are liars.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mXuagX2xChI

If employers do not have the right to ask women whether they intend to make babies on the company’s time, and thereby disrupt the workplace, then why do they have the right to impose a thought crimes test?

I didn’t say employers have the right to impose a thought crimes test. I said that your stupid fantasy law tramples an employer’s right to determine if an employee is satisfactory, and is predicated on the notion of a right to employment. No such right to employment exists. The fact that you think it should exist makes you in the very least a socialist.

If an employer fires you because you say something stupid, that tramples none of your rights. You do not have the right to be employed. If your employer fires you because you’re a women then a right has been violated. An employer cannot discriminate on the basis of gender. If your employer fires you because you are black, then a right has been violated. An employer cannot discriminate on the basis of race. If your employer fires you because you are 50, then a right has been violated. An employer cannot discriminate on the basis of age over 40.

An employer interviews you so that he can discriminate on the basis of the things that come out of your stupid mouth. This is and should be perfectly legal. Once you’re hired you can’t go to your employer and say that you’re going to shoot everyone in the office and expect that your speech will be legally protected through the preservation of your job. That would be idiotic. Just like your stupid law.

I never said I was fantasising about 12 year old girls;

I actually accused you of wanting to have sex with 12 year old boys. So we’re still on the same page.

But I just don’t get why you would even bother denying the accusation. After all, you also fantasize about stuffing balls in people’s mouths. You fantasize about relationships with women in general. You fantasize about how much wealth you supposedly have. And last but not least you fantasize about murdering millions of people for their supposed crimes.

You really are off base on everything you write. If you knew anything about me (you don’t), you would know that I am one of the most vehemently anti-socialist types you will ever meet. I have absolutely no use for the doctrine. As for you, you know absolutely nothing about socialist doctrine. If you will take the trouble to read the socialist literature like I have, then you will learn that both racial equality and equal employment rights for women have been core socialist doctrine from day one.

Read either Marx, Engels, Kautsky, Lenin, Klara Zetkin or any other socialist author on the “woman question” and you will discover that they all endorsed the “liberation” of women into the job market, mandatory maternity leave so that women would not have to choose between career and family and all the policies that are currently wrongfully in effect. Anti-discrimination, racial equality statutes are also a core feature of socialist, particularly Marxist-Socialist, doctrine. The Communist Party, the ultimate advocates of socialism, advocated equal rights for Negroes in employment from the moment that the Communist Party, originally called the Workers Party until about 1928, was organized in America. Civil Rights were also devised by the Party in the 1920’s as part of their program for overthrowing the white social structure of the U.S. It might also interest you to know that the socialists were among the staunchest advocates of giving women the still unearned and undeserved right to vote. And, if you take the trouble to read John Lott’s researches, you will also discover that women and their votes were and still are the single biggest cause of the growth of socialism in the U.S. In every single state where women got the vote prior to the passage of the 19th amendment there was a virtual doubling of expenditures of state funds immediately thereafter.

In short, you brainless pseudo-libertarian horses ass, you are as completely unqualified to discuss socialism as you are utterly unqualified to discuss German labor camps during WW2. Now back to employment rights. You keep setting up straw men to knock down. The real issue here is not someone getting fired for using the “N” word. The issue is employers suppressing political dissent by making it clear that the price of a job is keeping your mouth shut on hyper-sensitive subjects. Your argument that nobody has a “right” to a job is Alice-in-Wonderland bullshit. In the modern world no one (other than the economically independent like me) can survive without a job. Whatever libertarian book taught you such bullshit isn’t worth reading. Saying that prohibiting employers from terminating employees over unpopular opinions is “Socialism” is like saying that restraint of trade laws are “Socialism”. It’s nonsense. Your understanding of Socialism does not go beyond knowing that Socialism advocates the public ownership of the means of production. As to the feminist and racial equality aspects of Socialist doctrine, you exist in total and abysmal ignorance (your normal state of intellectual vegetation).

Finally, it is the money I actually do possess and my sexual inclinations which are purely heterosexual. If I tell you to shove your balls down your throat, that merely means I’m telling you to fuck off; it does not express any desire to fuck your incredibly ugly face.

you would know that I am one of the most vehemently anti-socialist types you will ever meet.

That’s why you wrote a law that creates a right to employment.

If you will take the trouble to read the socialist literature like I have, then you will learn that both racial equality and equal employment rights for women have been core socialist doctrine from day one.

It’s also at the core of capitalist doctrine. The difference is in the concept of equality. Capitalists believe in equal opportunity. Socialists believe in engineered equality. Socialists engineer equality in the same way your stupid law tries to engineer an equality of ideas in the workplace. Your equality is engineered by limiting the power of the individual using the authority of government.

The real issue here is not someone getting fired for using the “N” word. The issue is employers suppressing political dissent by making it clear that the price of a job is keeping your mouth shut on hyper-sensitive subjects.

The “price of a job” is determined by a contract between an employer and an employee. Your stupid law notwithstanding, an employer should have every right to protect and administer the reputation and political standing of the business. It is the employer’s business, not the employee’s business. If the employer doesn’t want to project the image that it tolerates bullshit like yours, the employer should have every right to sanction your speech.

Saying that prohibiting employers from terminating employees over unpopular opinions is “Socialism” is like saying that restraint of trade laws are “Socialism”.

Man, you completely suck at paraphrasing too. I said that the belief in a right to employment is a socialist belief. Your law is predicated on the notion that termination on grounds that are based in “unpopular views” is a violation of a right to employment.

You don’t understand that do you?

You don’t have a right to stand in my front yard. If you stand in my front yard and spout your shit I can remove you from my front yard without violating your right to free speech. The same applies to a place of employment. You do not have a right to be employed. If you spout your shit at your office your employer has the right to remove you from the office without violating your right to free speech.

If you force the employer to keep employees in this circumstance, the law that does this is a socialist law. It’s that simple, John.

You’re a filthy fucking socialist.

Mr. College Punk:

It is obvious that you have never lived in the real world. You probably have not even graduated yet – and possibly never will. I suspect that you waste your time reading “The Fountainhead” and “Atlas Shrugged”, like I used to Your understanding of both freedom of speech and socialism is nil. Capitalism, prior to the 1964 Civil Rights law, never stood for either sexual or racial equality in the marketplace. Up until 1964, the economy functioned on the concept of family wage, which was the idea that companies should hire white men only and pay them a wage sufficient to support their wives and families. That is a documented fact of history, as I know because I was alive at the time, something that you probably were not.

The anti-discrimination law was promulgated by the same Jews who concocted the “gas chamber” hoax, just in case you had not noticed. I certainly do not believe in enforced equality of result as people are inherently unequal. Only a socialist believes in that. But you, the supposed advocate of capitalism, believe that the government should be allowed to dictate whether employers hire blacks or women. That is remarkable government coercion of an employers freedom of choice by a man who believes in no protection of opinions from private retaliation.

In short Fang, you are a jerk. As to the expression of opinions, employers can fire an employee if he writes a letter to a newspaper under his real name and the employer does not happen to like the view expressed. So the speech need not take place on the job. It seems to me that if employers can be forced to subsidize two legged cows reproducing on the company’s time, a function that obviously does not belong in any workplace, then they can also be forced to recognize the job security of those who express opinions of which they disapprove.

And since socialism bothers you so much, you might reflect, you terminal dick head, that socialism, as an idea marketable to the masses, was promulgated by the very Jews you adore. Everywhere in Europe from the 19th century to present, the socialist leaders oin all countries were Jews. Get Jack Jacob’s books on the subject, not to mention Jonathan Frankel’s and Norah Levin’s, and see if I am not absolutely right. I note that, as always, you did not try to rebut my assertions regarding the teachings of socialist doctrine, because you can’t.

The work place is privately run, surely. But the government overrides the employers rights in many ways. It forces the employer to hire minorities and women, thereby violating an employer’s right to hire who he chooses. It forces the employer to provide baby making vacations which violate the rights of the other employees who must do the extra labor. It mandates all sorts of vacations and other benefits that the employer might not choose to provide were the matter left to pure bargaining in the marketplace. Why, then, denounce as “socialist”, a law prohibiting the employer from doing what the government cannot? The answer is obvious to any one but a fucking idiot like you.

So to sum up, you admit to being a filthy fucking socialist.

Everywhere in Europe from the 19th century to present, the socialist leaders oin all countries were Jews.

Wrong again dummy.

Henri de Saint-Simon – (Christian)

Auguste Comte (secular humanist)

Charles Fourier….

This one’s the most ironic, John. Can you guess why? Not only did this guy start and support the feminist movement, but he also thought that the Jews were the source of all evil.

Sorry, Pizza Pig Face:

Although socialism started with the Fouriests, by the late nineteenth/ytwentieth centuries, socialism was everywhere a movement under the control of the Jews. Wrong as always, spaghetti head. Actually, I believe in the abolition of 90% of all government spending, the restoration of a 100% gold standard, the abolition of social security, the repeal of the income tax, the repeal of fraudulent fractional reserve banking and a host of other things that any rational mind (exlude yourself) would never characterize as socialist.

Shine a flashlight up your asshole.

FREE SPEECH

It was a habit of Franklin Roosevelt to refer to defenders of the Constitution as defenders of “horse and buggy” days. This writer has never been a fan of Franklin Roosevelt’s “New Deal”. But it is obvious that the First Amendment which only protects freedom of speech from governmental restriction, not employer retaliation, is indeed a product of “horse and buggy” days. People cannot afford to destroy their incomes or livelihoods as the price of expressing their real views. If people know that they will be fired or blacklisted if they offend powerful vested interests, they will keep their mouths shut as the price of survival. There are adolescent minds that will claim that the right to free speech does not exist on the job. They shall argue, in truly infantile fashion, that the fact that you have the right to your opinions does not give you the right to express said opinion on their front yard.

We shall begin by noting that professors in universities enjoy tenure which makes it impossible for them to be fired from their positions because someone might not like their researches or conclusions. “Academic freedom” is the idea that they should have the right to research and publish, without the fear of economic retaliation or career destruction, if their ideas prove unpopular. The taxpayers frequently do not like having to pay for the salaries of those who they believe are attacking their values and their way of life (which is indeed the case, in a great many instances). Nevertheless, the system is firmly established. No one thinks to ask why employees in the private labor market should not enjoy the same protection for the same reasons. It could be argued that a university where the development of ideas is the entire raison d’etre for its existence is distinguishable from a private enterprise where the primary function is the making of profit. Nevertheless, the principle of protecting unpopular views from economic and career destruction is still valid. If one objects that employers should not have to deal with employees whose views they detest, that is certainly no different than forcing taxpayers to pay the salaries of professors with whose views they disagree.

It is increasingly obvious that it is private economic power, not the government, that is the real threat to freedom of expression in these United States. Charlie Sheen, Mel Gibson, Rick Sanchez, Helen Thomas, Oliver Stone and many others, have had their freedom of expression curtailed and their careers destroyed, not by the government, but by a subversive, alien, nation-within-the-nation. This alien nation called Jewry is the real threat to freedom of speech within these United States. It is this ethnic monopoly on “acceptable opinion” that is the real issue. That is the issue which minds that focus on childish distinctions between the government and private behavior seek to evade.

HISTORICAL CAUSALITY

It is rather amusing to listen to various pundits claim that the current antagonism between Islam and the west is merely a resurgence of an ancient historical struggle of the Dark Ages. This is rather like the English propaganda of WW1 which argued that the invasion of Belgium of 1914 was the re-emergence of the Teutonic “wolf” that had leaped out of the Teutoburg forest to destroy the Roman legions. It is nonsense, of course. Historical continuity does not extend over centuries. (The only exception is the Jews, whose hatred of the non-Jewish world has continued, unabated, from the ancient to the present.)

Islam is actually at war with Zionism which has, and continues, to make war on the Arabs of Palestine. Sine the United States, under Jewish control, continues to support Israel, naturally the U.S. irritates the Islamic world. The Jews, in order to prevent the American public from realizing this truth, have concocted a hoax of a vast Islamic “war with the west”. The only element in this that has any truth is that there is a vast Islamic immigrant invasion of Europe. (The Jews, of course, never admit that they tore down the “whites only” immigration laws that let them in.) Thus, the same Jews who scream about the threat of Islam simultaneously let the Moslems in. This is all so ludicrous that one can only marvel at the stupidity of the Americans who fall for it.

Pizza Pig Face:

O but I do know o great propounder of riddles! You refer, most obviously, to that well-known liberal of Victorian England, John Stuart Mill, who decried the “eye for an eye” morality of the Jews at the same time he licked pussy for female suffrage. That did not even require any internet research.

Do better, bozo brain.

Fourier was also a flaming anti-Semite, shit head.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=n4EfufBl1cU

Is he right or is he right? The quotes are accurate – like mine.

THE FIX IS IN

Walter Duranty was, of course, the New York Times journalist who lied through his teeth about the Ukrainian famine of 1932-1933 in which seven to ten million people were deliberately starved to death by Joseph Stalin and his Jewish gulag commissars. Duranty is seen by some as a journalistic aberration; he is seen by others as the prototype of the modern “politically correct” journalist. All journalists are essentially Walter Duranty clones. Regardless of whether they are conservative or liberal, right or left wing, all journalists serve essentially the same Jewish-Zionist interests. There are many indications of this. One of the most blatant is the insistence that Israel is always in the right or that it always acts in self defense. But there are many others. The media consistently attack the idea that America is a white country for white people. They constantly promote the cause of minorities and blacks in particular. They do this at the same time that they sing the praises of the hyper-ethnocentric state of Israel in which Arabs are treated as dirt. Another tip off of an alien agenda at work is the constant harping on the Holocaust, the alleged extermination of six million Jews by purported “gas chambers”. This obsession with the Holocaust is matched by an absolute refusal to investigate or discuss the Jewish origins of Communism.

Reporters are almost duty bound, as the price of a paycheck, to promote the doctrines of racial and sexual equality. No sustained, objective discussion of the evidence for greater white intelligence over black intelligence is permitted. At most, an occasional guest shall be permitted to argue this thesis, only to be mocked and derided. Women are always to be portrayed as victims of “sex discrimination” ignoring that almost all real discrimination in America is in favor of women. Thus, no one shall be permitted to point out that women come first in divorce court, that women enjoy automatic custody of children, that women enjoy exemption from combat duty or that women get first place on the life boats.

Reporters unswervingly accept the line that America has a sworn duty to police the world. A retreat into “isolationism” or, more properly, neutrality, is unthinkable. Only a Patrick Buchanan is permitted as token opposition to this kind of thinking. The fix is in. The media are following a Party line, and the Party line is, in all cases, the Zionist Party line.

COMMISSARS OF THE SCIMITAR

According to Zionist propaganda, the Arabs are terrorizing the Jews. Every day the Arabs fire deadly rockets at the Jews from Gaza and perpetrate suicide bombings. No wonder the poor Jews are so traumatized. But, in this age of short historical memory, there once was a far more deadly abuse of Jews by Arabs. In the heyday of Communism, the Grand Mufti of the Kremlin, Haj Amin al-Stalin, terrorized the poor Jews with his Arab commissars. Saintly “scientific socialist” types with names like Reichmann, Spiegelglass, Solts, Berman, Fraenkel, Firin, Rottenberg, Kaganovich, Yagoda, Sverdlov, Levitan and thousands of others were ruthlessly starved and worked to death by conscienceless commissars of the scimitar. And while the Prince Alis and Auda Abu Tay’s of the gulags were doing their murderous work, what did the Islamo-Fascists of the western media say? Why, they offered nothing but praise. The Grand Mufti of Communism, Dear “Uncle Joe”, was creating a wondrous new world by putting Jewish commissars where they belonged – in hideous death camps.

Walter Wahabi of the Sand Dune Times denied that there was any Kiev Ghetto famine. There were only Jews living off of diminishing dividends, as admitted by Goldman Schmucks in its five year stock report. This horrible mass murder of Jews by Arab Communists has been hidden by a hoax of Zyklon B geysers in the Jordanian desert. The “Fumes of Arabia” are more deadly than the firecrackers of Gaza.

http://books.google.com/books?id=4oJUKoN-oIwC&pg=PA167&lpg=PA167&dq=charles+fourier+on+jews&source=bl&ots=2p34E2lXIh&sig=sbAm1TQ-V43MpMETp82NXdLfLTY&hl=en&ei=VLJ9TYjrOo7trAGpz-2MBg&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=5&ved=0CD0Q6AEwBA#v=onepage&q=charles%20fourier%20on%20jews&f=false

Ho, ho, ho, master of spaghetti sauce scholarship! Fourier proposed letting only one in fifty Jews engage in commerce. How very “National Socialist” of him. I have no use for socialism and regard Fourier as an idiot but he was right that Jewish commercial stranglehold can can cause a problem for any society that allows it to develop. Maybe we need Henry Ford style capitalism for whites and gulags for kikes.

http://www.amazon.com/Jewish-Socialist-Movements-1871-1917-Civilization/dp/0838631517

Here is where you can find some facts to help your ignorant, uninformed scribbling, Pizza brain. We all know how you hate reading and research. It isn’t nearly as much fun as pretending that you know what you are talking about. In fact, it takes many hours of reading, cross-comparing and analysis. Not your style, obviously.

P.S.

Mixing stupidity with pasta produces brains like yours.

THE VETO OF POWER

Recently, the entire world at the United Nations voted to condemn Israel’s illegal and prolonged occupation of Arab land. The United States, standing alone, vetoed the resolution. What does the United States know that the rest of the world does not? Why, nothing. The U.S. has no factual rebuttal to the resolution. The illegality of the occupation has never been questioned. The U.S. is doing the bidding of power. Zionist power controls the U.S. as surely as the Jewish commissars once ruled Soviet Russia. Barack Obama, a man who is known to privately oppose Israel’s policies of occupation, had to swallow and bow down to the dictates of his backers. Those with long memories may recall that when the choice between Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton for the Democratic nomination was being decided, the Chicago Daily News published a debate on whether Obama could be trusted to serve Israel’s interests. The minority view was that he was pro-Palestinian and could not be trusted. The majority view, now proven correct, was that when crunch time arrived, Barack Obama would serviley obey his masters.

Barack Obama’s veto should bring a cynical smile to the lips of ex-president Jimmy Carter. Here we have absolute proof of what Carter and every other retired politician of both the left and right have said for decades –that Israel totally controls the U.S. government. The Middle East is in an uproar over decades of U.S. and Zionist misrule. In the midst of this revolutionary upheaval, what does the U.S. do? It sides with the Zionist traitors who are the cause of all U.S. woes and misfortunes in the Arabian peninsula. The United States government has openly proclaimed itself the whore of Zion.

Everywhere in Europe from the 19th century to present, the socialist leaders oin all countries were Jews.

Poor John. When you get made a fool of your only recourse is to move the goal posts.

by the late nineteenth/ytwentieth centuries, socialism was everywhere a movement under the control of the Jews.

Vladimer Lenin
Joseph Stalin
Mao Tse-Tung
Kim Il Sung
Kim Jung Il
Hugo Chavez

Dummy…

I believe in the abolition of 90% of all government spending, the restoration of a 100% gold standard, the abolition of social security, the repeal of the income tax, the repeal of fraudulent fractional reserve banking and a host of other things that any rational mind (exlude yourself) would never characterize as socialist.

You also believe that someone is entitled to their employment regardless of how they comport themselves while operating as an agent of their employer. This makes you a filthy fucking socialist.

Fourier was also a flaming anti-Semite, shit head.

Yeah…Just like you he was a flaming socialist anti Semite shit head. He’s a great example of how “Everywhere in Europe from the 19th century to present, the socialist leaders oin all countries were Jews.” Isn’t he? I mean, now that you’re a socialist and all have you suddenly seen the light or something? You seem to be arguing my point.

Recently, the entire world at the United Nations

Heh. If it’s the security council resolution I think you’re talking about you mean 15 countries instead of the entire world.

The United States, standing alone, vetoed the resolution.

The U.S. once again adhered to the Negroponte Doctrine, which has little to do with being directed by Jews, and more to do with diplomacy that recognizes the Muslims are just as much to blame for the situation. This doctrine requires that all resolutions regarding the conflict have elements that contain:

* A strong and explicit condemnation of all terrorism and incitement to terrorism;
* A condemnation by name of the al-Aqsa Martyrs’ Brigade, Islamic Jihad and Hamas, groups that have claimed responsibility for suicide attacks on Israel;
* An appeal to all parties for a political settlement of the crisis;
* A demand for improvement of the security situation as a condition for any call for a withdrawal of Israeli armed forces to positions they held before the September 2000 start of the Second intifada Palestinian uprising.

If it doesn’t have that the U.S. will veto. Of course, John conveniently left out the fact that the U.S. government called the settlements illegitimate on their own.

http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/hillary-clinton-israeli-settlements-illegitimate/story?id=12952834

A CASE STUDY IN THAT WHICH DOES NOT EXIST

A professor Jeffrey Herf in Chicago promotes the line that any idea of Jewish ethnic solidarity across national lines is a myth. One wonders how professor Herf reconciles this thesis with certain well known facts. Let’s examine just one episode inconsistent with his thesis. Prior to the creation of the state of Israel American Zionists organized a vast arms smuggling operation on behalf of the Jewish underground in Palestine. This operation was transcontinental in scope, involving Jews of many different ideologies in many countries, united only by ethnicity and Zionism and manipulating governments all over the world. Let us examine how it was done.

The operation began with a meeting of prominent American Jews in New York City. The number was only about fifteen. One, however, was the extremely influential Rabbi Abba Hillel Silver, the chief advisor to Senator Robert A. Taft of Ohio. These men decided that the Jewish nation hood movement had to be supported by arms and munitions from America. They organized to that end. One of their stratagems was to buy large quantities of WW2 army surplus. Prominent Jews in the sheet metal business and related industries began acquiring machine guns and ammunition either by buying it or stealing it. The next problem was how to ship the material to Palestine in violation of American export laws. Various methods were employed. Many arms shipments were packed within carpet roles or fruit cases and shipped as “freight”. Unions, dock workers and public officials were corrupted, bought off or intimidated. Unconfirmed allegations have been made that J. Edgar Hoover and the FBI were co-opted into the operation. A particular problem was how to fly the supplies to Palestine. The Zionists conceived the idea of registering planes they had purchased in America in Panama to avoid American export restrictions.

This necessarily involved the cooperation of various South American governments. This was achieved by both economic and political contacts. Samuel Zemmaray, the chief share holder of the gigantic United Fruit Company, was very influential in this process. So was the dictator, Antonio Somoza of Nicaragua, who agreed to provide aircraft and bases for flying transports overseas. On the diplomatic front, South American politicians provided invaluable support to the Zionists. The president of the General Assembly of the United Nations, Aranha of Brazil, was a Zionist agent. When the United Nations were debating the partition of Palestine resolution of November 1947, it was president Aranha who delayed the final vote on the resolution several times so that the Zionists could coerce the necessary votes to obtain passage of the resolution. Garcia Granados, the president of Guatemala, provided similar services to the Zionists as documented in his book, “The Birth of Israel”.

The Zionists needed a base in Europe to transport the arms to Israel-in-the-making. Transatlantic flights to Palestine were simply too long to consider. They found their allies in the Communists of Czechoslovakia. With the approval of Joseph Stalin, the Czech Communists agreed to train Zionist pilots and provide them with high quality captured German Messerschmidts. The planes were then refueled in Communist Yugoslavia under the direction of a Mr. Joseph Korbel and then flown to Palestine to attack the Arabs. (Mr. Korbel later came to America and established an institute for international studies in Denver, Colorado where two future U.S. Secretaries of State, Condoleezza Rice and Madeline Korbel/Albright were trained. The Zionist international does get around.)

Back in America, the Zionists were extremely busy. Jews like Mickey Cohen, the L.A. Jewish mobster, Mr. Greenberg, the Las Vegas newspaper editor, Jewish casino owners, Lyndon Johnson and his friend Jim Novy and many, many others were funneling arms, munitions and money to the Jewish underground. Former camps for German prisoners of war, like the camp in Oswego New York were used as training grounds for Zionist troops to fight the Arabs. This amazing activity, which included the Jewish community in America, the corruption of the U.S. government, the recruitment of South American governments, the corruption of the United Nations, the assistance of the Soviet Communists and the help of Jews all over the world in pursuit of an ethnic agenda, leads to only one conclusion. Jews are indeed an international community, bound by ties of blood – and no denial by professor Jeffrey Herf shall alter that fact.

More drivel from a man who thinks through his asshole.
The Soviet Union, the worlds foremost example of socialism, was created and staffed overwhelmingly by Jews. The theoreticians of socialism throughout Europe were overwhelmingly Jewish. Edward Bernstein, the founder of gradualist Masrxism in Germany, Karl Kautsky in Austria, Marx, Ferdinand Lassalle,Abraham Cahan and the Jewish Socialist “Forward” in New York , Adler in Austria, on and on it goes. If one looks at socialism in Russia, the leading names were Moses Hess, Chaim Zhitlovsky, Dov Ber Borochov, Aaron Lieberman, John Mill (not the more famous one in England, a Jew despite his name), Vladimir Medem, the chief theoretician of the Bund, the one-quarter Jewish Vladimir Lenin (grandfather named Blank), Martov, Theodore Dan, M.I. Lieber, etc.

Socialism in America was primarily promoted by Jews as well. The fact that Eugene Debs was not a Jew does not refute the point. It is also true that the foreign language sections of the the Socialist Party also contribute a fair number of members. But none of that gets around the fact that socialism, as an ideology, has always been duirected by New York Jews. Get Tony Michels “A Fire in Their Hearts” if you do not believe it. You can also try reading Gerald Sorin’s “The Prophetic Minority” for confirmation.

The bullshit about the U.N. veto is precisely that. The U.S. has been vetoing anti-Zionist resolutions at ake Success for decades. This is just more of your pettifogging dialectics. You never can argue anything substantive. I never argued that an employer had no right to terminate an employe. If the employee is perpetually absent, tardy, does not follow direction, defecates in his seat, spends all day in the bathroom, etc, of course the employer has the right of dismissal. What I did say is that no employer should have the right to take way a livelihood because of the expression of an unpopular opinion. If you think that is “socialism”, I will only say that since you do not know who foisted socialism on the world, you naturally would not know anything about socialist doctrine either.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jewish_left

Here is a sufficient indictment of your nonsense that socialism was not a predominantly ewish movement. Continue to spew your epithets. It shall do you no good.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jewish_right

Here is a sufficient indictment of your nonsense that socialism was predominantly ewish movement. Continue to spew your epithets. It shall do you no good

IS A.I.P.A.C. THE NEW BIROBIDZHAN COMMITTEE?

Students of things Jewish shall recall the organization called Ambijan, the American Birobidzhan Committee. Created in 1934, it was designed to promote Birobidzhan, the Jewish autonomous Region in Siberia. It was extremely influential and raised large sums of money in the 1930’s and 1940’s to promote Stalin’s “Palestine in Siberia”. American politicians on both the national and local levels frequently appeared as speakers and lavished glowing praise on Birobidzhan, much as American politicos lavish similar praise on the state of Israel today, and for similar reasons. Birobidzhan was to solve the “Jewish problem” and create a wonder land free of anti-Semitism and glorious, emancipated Jewish nationality. A few choice quotations from Henry Felix Srebrnik’s “Dreams of Nationality: American Jewish Communists and the Soviet Birobidzhan Project, 1924-1951” should illustrate the point.

“Senator Claude Pepper addressed those in attendance at the November 21 (1948) annual dinner. He predicted that Birobidzhan would soon become an autonomous republic with a Jewish majority, ‘which will reflect their character, genius and their dreams’ He urged the delegates to ‘keep up your great fight; continue your great work; hold on to your old and strong faith.’ Finally, he praised the Soviet Union as ‘a nation which has recognized the dignity of all people’, as ‘a nation wherein discrimination against anybody on account of race is a crime’ and as a nation ‘in fundamental sympathy with the progress of mankind’. (p.41)Z

When, in 1936, the Soviet Union decided to allow 1,000 Jewish families outside the country to immigrate to Birobidzhan, Jewish leaders and their sycophants in America were most enthusiastic. Congressman Emmanuel Celler of New York enthused that it “will be the beginning of a movement that will help tens of thousands of Jews to find a haven of refuge.” These Jews will be taken out of their misery and transferred to a country where they will enjoy economic security and equality of opportunity.” They would have self-government and the use of their own language, Yiddish. “Never in the history of the world has such a glorious opportunity been offered to the Jews.” Samuel Levy, the Manhattan borough president, stated his gratification at the lack of anti-Semitism in the Soviet Union, and added that Ambijan’s cause was “deserving of the support of every American.”

Vito Marcantonio, who represented the 20th Congressional district of East Harlem for the CP-influenced American Labor Party (ALP), also chimed in: In a radio address he delivered over WHN on August 22, 1936, Marcantonio expressed his admiration “for the splendid way in which Russia has solved its problem of racial and national minorities.” There was, he stated, “absolute equality” for all peoples of the Soviet Union, and it is especially gratifying to know that there is no anti-Semitism in present day Russia.” (p.41)

Anyone can compare these breathtakingly absurd statements of long ago with the equally absurd statements of praise of Israel today. Just as the Jewish commissars of the 1930’s were abolishing anti-Semitism and creating paradise on earth, so too Israel is creating “democracy” in the Middle East. The Zionist state is making the desert bloom the same way that Birobidzhan made Siberia flourish with “scientific socialism”. The politicians fall all over themselves to praise Israel the same way they fell all over themselves to praise Stalin’s Russia. The reader will note the repeated references in the quotations to the elimination of anti-Semitism in Russia. This forms an amazing contrast to the post-1970’s propaganda that Communism was “persecuting” the Jews. Clearly, something does not fit. Communism once was very good for the Jews it – it eliminated anti-Semitism. What happened? What happened is that Communism cannibalized its leading ethnic minority. Until that happened Communism was beloved by Jews.

To read the history of the old Birobidzhan Committee is to realize that the force which rules the world merely changed its base of operations. Pledging allegiance to Israel has replaced swearing allegiance to scientific socialism. But the faces of the Zionist commissars are exactly the same.

The bullshit boys are deadly silent. Documented facts are too much for them.

STALINIST SPEECH CODES

America is awash in speech and behavior codes that are essentially Stalinist. Every corporation and business now has mandatory seminars in thought, speech and behavior training. They call it “hostile environment” and “sexual harassment” training. What it really is is Party line indoctrination under the camouflage of concocted legal concepts. The origin of these concepts is very interesting. Most people will tell you that these concepts date back to the 1964 Civil Rights Act. That was the initial enabling act, surely. But the concepts actually go back further than that. In 1943 a Polish-Jewish lawyer named Rafael Lemkin published a book, “Axis Rule in Occupied Europe” by the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace. This book marked the first appearance of genocide as a legal concept. Most people think of genocide as the deliberate mass murder of a group of people. But that is not how Lemkin defined the term.

Lemkin spends the greater part of his book essentially describing genocide as the ancient art of denationalization. Thus, he goes on at interminable length describing German restrictions on Jewish culture, German expropriation of Jewish property, German deportation and segregation of the Jews, etc. Nowhere, however, does he define genocide as mere mass murder. Quite the contrary. He makes it explicit that mass killing conducted for purely political reasons (eliminating “enemies of the state”, as in Soviet Russia, for example) would not constitute genocide. Genocide is something more and something less. Genocide involves causing harm to minorities based on their ethnicity. The harm need not be physical but merely mental or emotional. Thus, abolishing Jewish culture or calling a Jew by the “K” word would constitute genocide but mass murder of enemies of the socialist state by Jewish commissars would not constitute genocide.

Genocide, thus defined, becomes a very elastic and self-serving concept, ideally constituted to class war fare. In particular, it is ideal for overthrowing a formerly dominant majority white population by prohibiting criticism or opposition to the legally favored minorities which are to displace them. Anyone can research Lemkin’s clever formula and see in it the germs of all that has come since. It was most assuredly not an accident that Lemkin was a Jew and an opponent of Adolf Hitler. That is why his genocide concept is never applied against his fellow Zionists and their literal denationalization of the Palestinian Arabs.

So socialism isn’t Jewish, is it? Note in particular the hundreds of thousands of Jews in the Jewish People’s Committee and the Jewish Labor Committee.

http://www.come-and-hear.com/dilling/chapt11.html

Time to declare victory. The bullshit boys have run out of rebuttals.

Heil He Who Knows All!

Heil He Who Knows All!

Megalomania is defined as: [1]

1. A psychopathological condition characterized by delusional fantasies of wealth, power, or omnipotence.

Megalomania is a behavioral characteristic where a person has delusional superfluous thoughts of being wealthy or powerful or when one thinks that he is a genius or omnipotent. Megalo in Greek means “large”, something very grand. Mania means obsession.

Megalomania hence means the self estimation of having achieved enormous social or political or corporate influence, or having acquired wealth and grandeur. It is a psychological state of a person.

To be precise, Megalomania is a preoccupied thought and representation of one’s dreams in real life. What one actually tries to achieve in life is prematurely expressed in a manner that one has already achieved it. It is also termed as delusion of grandeur.

Megalomania is a dangerous psychological disease. And this disease ruins one own self. A person suffering from megalomania which is almost equal to paranoid schizophrenia tries to maintain an inflated status in the society. He thinks that he is a well acclaimed personality in the society and that every body must honor him for his deeds. Megalomaniacs usually try to take shortcuts to their success. They dream to become one of the most popular figures in the world and hence try to reach that goal in the shortest possible way. During this process, the individual tends to maintain the standard that he has not reached yet and looses everything that he has presently.

Megalomania is an illusion and is an ego which is often ridiculed. It can also be termed as Narcissism or can be considered a part of Narcissism. Narcissism in psychology means love with one self, self appreciation and self admiration. This also means that a Megalomaniac has higher than normal love for himself. This abnormal narcissism can be called as malignant narcissism.
A megalomaniac over estimates his capabilities and hence usually turns out to be a failure.

John, any dead silence on the part of people willing to converse with you is more likely due to the lack of interest in your obsession, rather then an inability to demonstrate to a rational mind that you are insane.

You do know that you’re crazy right? You do realize that you’re ranting on a website that hasn’t been updated in almost 19 months now? In what capacity do you really think you’ve declared victory?

Of course I’m crazy – because you say so. And if I’m really so crazy and as irrelevant as you pretend, why the driving desire to debate me?After all, if it were really the nonsense you claim, you wouldn’t be responding.

No, pizza face bus boy. You fear the truth. People are increasingly reading this kind of material and are learning how they’ve been lied to. Calling me “crazy” ain’t gonna stop it.

In re “being a failure”. Do you have ten million behind you?

LOSER.

In re “megalomania”:

Does that apply to “Black Jesus” presidents who think they can solve everything while solving nothing? Or does it even apply to Pizza faces who think they know something when they can’t even research elementary historical facts?

I don’t need megalomania; all I neeed is my research library.

And now for a little fun with Mr. Pizza Face. Pizza Face loves to quibble about quotations. So let’s give him one from Harvey Klehr’s well-known volume (although not to Pizza Face obviously), “Communist Cadre: The Social Background of the American Communist Party Elite”. The quotation is from page 50. It reads:

“”A variety of facors help to account for the compartvely large number of Jews who were attracted to Communism – for example, the conditions of Jewish life both in Tsarist Russia and in the slums of the Lower East Side of New York, and the transfer of Jewish messianic hopes to a secular substitute.”

Gee, isn’t this what I have been saying repeatedly?

People are increasingly reading this kind of material and are learning how they’ve been lied to

Too bad your delusions won’t allow you to see the abject irony of this statement.

What a sad miserable life it must be; the dedication to an obsession with hatred. And, John, the “ten million” behind you are figments; the phantom playthings of your twisted fantasy.

You no more control them then you control your compulsion to argue about Jews on a 2 year old blog post.

Pizza Face:

Why don’t you get a job at Domino’s for $8 an hour? I don’t think you can make it as a shrink. By the way, did you just make 500% in the silver market? I did.

LOSER

Pizza Face:

Have you tried hating Arabs in Israel? It should relieve you from hating me.

THE WARREN COMMISSION LEARNED IT FROM THE NUREMBERG COURT

As everybody knows, the Warren Commission rewrote the laws of physics with its magical “single bullet” theory. This bullet did things never seen before or since. It changed directions and went through bones and marrow without leaving a dent on the casing or shell. It was also fired from an inferior gun with a bad sight by a lousy marksman with pin-point accuracy. It left major holes as entrance wounds and minor holes as exit wounds. This bullet was truly marvelous. But let no one think that the fabulous “single bullet” was unique. It was not. Its prototype, the “gas chambers” of Adolf Hitler, were even more fabulous. Those gas chambers were built underground at Auschwitz. This greatly facilitated the dispersal of the gas which is usually dealt with by building the gassing facility above ground. Then too, the “gas chambers” were not properly sealed or ventilated. They had no means of heating the gas to the necessary temperature for dispersal. And the room was not even big enough to hold the claimed number of victims. Hardly any trace of Zyklon B “Prussian Blue” residue can be found in the chambers where millions of Jews were supposedly killed. Why, it is enough to make JFK’s head explode a second time.

The Warren Commission managed to ignore all kinds of evidence from witnesses who saw shots coming from the grassy knoll, rather than the Texas Book Depository building. They overlooked evidence that Oswald was actually employed as an agent by the FBI. And they managed to rewrite witness statements to make the original statements mean what the Commission wanted them to say. They would not let Jack Ruby tell what he knew although Ruby badly wanted to talk. And, of course, they let the Dallas police Department do its own investigation of who let Ruby into the basement of the Dallas police headquarters to shoot Ruby. Naturally, the Dallas Police concluded that Ruby, a man with deep connections to hundreds of officers in the Department, got in all by himself.

It was all very innovative. Now, where did the Warren Commission learn these investigatory techniques? Why, at Nuremberg obviously! At Nuremberg hardly an original German document was introduced. All the documents were “certified copies of copies”. Genuine German documents of the Auschwitz camp were carted off by the Soviet Union and concealed from the tribunal. Thus, the Jews testifying to “gassings” at the tribunal did not have to explain the German records that showed only about 150,000 deaths of all causes at the camp (only a percentage of which were Jews).They were not confronted by the fact that the Zyklon B used at the camp was used to control typhus epidemics by killing typhus bearing lice or the fact that the that the crematory ovens were there to burn bodies that died of disease. Heinrich Himmler’s order that the “death rate in the camps was to be reduced at all costs” was, of course, not introduced. No one performed any forensic tests of the alleged “gas chambers”. (That was only done fifty years later.) Genuine German records showing that German policy was to deport the Jews to the occupied territories in the east were suppressed. So too, was Adolf Hitler’s dictum that he wanted “the Jewish question shelved until the end of the war”. The fact that the Communist governments being imposed on Eastern Europe after the war was 75% Jewish was not mentioned at Nuremberg. After all, was it conceivable that the Jews supposedly being exterminated were actually hiding out east of the Ural Mountains during the war? A Jewish newspaper in Sweden during the war claimed that 50-75% of Russia’s Communist Jews had been evacuated eastward before the Wehrmacht arrived. This newspaper was naturally not quoted by the prosecution at Nuremberg.

The Nuremberg Court, like the Warren Commission, arrived at the conclusions it wanted to reach. This process was aided and abetted by the fact that 2400 out of the 3000 total personnel behind the scenes at Nuremberg were Jews. Robert Jackson, Francis Biddle, Sir Hartley Shawcross and others were merely the front men for the real orchestrators of the kangaroo court. It was rather like the Warren Commission, where the presence of Allen Dulles was to help cover up the involvement of U.S. intelligence agencies in the president’s murder. Earl Warren, the man who was responsible for the round up and internment of Japanese-Americans in World War Two, was the Robert Jackson of the Warren Commission. The German defendants at Nuremberg were hung during the Jewish high holidays in October between the Day of Atonement and the Day of Final Judgment. They were ritually executed, just like Lee Harvey Oswald was ritually sacrificed to a pre-determined verdict and judgment.

The Kennedy assassination has generated an enormous literature disagreeing with the obviously doctored official conclusion. But the literature disproving the kangaroo court at Nuremberg is still very much underground. It is read privately by those deathly afraid of career destruction if they are found out. But the deniers of the mythical six million and the deniers of the mythical single bullet have something in common, nonetheless. Both are seekers after truth. And the truth, surprisingly enough, is the same in both cases. The real killers of John Kennedy were they who concocted the hoax of the “gas chambers”. And the motive, in both cases, was the same – to promote the interests of the emerging, and later extant, state of Israel. But that is another story for another essay.

Hey, Pizza face. If you like my latest creation, I’ll buy you a foreskin flavored topping.

Before you ask me where I would get foreskin flavored pizza toppings, let me just say I know the guy down at Rizzo’s Pizza. He owes me a favor or two and the guy is simply a genius when it comes to homosexually themed pizza ingredients.

Let me tell you; his foreskin toppings taste exactly like the real thing.

I should know.

Ronnie’s failed career as a satirist again How boring.

FACT THERAPY

Americans are rushing to mental health care professionals in ever greater numbers. But what Americans really need is not mental therapy, but fact therapy. Mental therapy solves nothing. In truth, it frequently makes the patient even more screwed up. But fact therapy is extremely therapeutic. A patient who undergoes fact therapy learns to look at the world with clear eyes. He does not need anyone to tell him what to think because the facts tell him everything. A person with fact therapy laughs at media commentators lying through their teeth. Who needs them?

Fact therapy will show you the faces of the Jewish commissars the TV set never told you about. Fact therapy will show you the Arab farms and villages that the Zionists say never existed in Palestine. Fact therapy will show you the truth on fake “gas chambers” and a mythical six million. Fact therapy is the key to an unknown universe. Once you learn the facts you will learn everything the powers-that-be do not want you to know. The next time you are feeling confused do not go to Dr. Freud with a prescription from Oprah Winfrey. Let Der Fuehrer massage your mind with verboten facts instead. You will never watch Dr. Phil again.

IN THE WOMB OF ZION

Nothing is more informative than reading Jewish scholars clarify the very issues that the Jew media specialize in confusing. Thus, the media that promote the myth of anti-Semitism in Soviet Russia always use Soviet anti-Zionism to “prove” their case. An excellent reference work on this little understood subject is “Communism and Zionism in Palestine: The Comintern and the Political Unrest in the 1920’s” by Jacob Hen-Tov published in 1974. The essential conflict between Communism and Zionism (both Jewish movements) is laid out with remarkable clarity by Hen-Tov on pp.67-68 of his study.

“In the preceding chapters, the focus has been on the intricate relationship between the Comintern and the Zionist settlement in Palestine as reflected in the unique political background of the Comintern’s Jewish Communist cadres and in the special role they played in the elaborate network of the Comintern’s front organizations. As noted Palestine received more than its proportionate share of the Comintern’s attention in the area, for reasons having to do with the internal political situation of the Soviet Union. In the Comintern’s thinking, Zionism in Palestine, irrespective of its economic and political strength, was psychologically linked with the unresolved Jewish question in Russia and with the strong sense of national identity (though not always affiliated with Zionism) that prevailed among the Jewish masses.

Zionism in Palestine, therefore, was not merely viewed as a local nationalist movement whose revival took place in some remote corner of the globe, but rather its development was viewed as a viable, relevant, and potentially quite dangerous issue linked directly to the very heart of the Soviet system.

In its struggle against Zionism in Palestine, the Comintern had at its disposal an extensive system of Communist front organizations, as well as a local Communist Party Organization, predominantly Jewish (much to the dislike of the Comintern’s bosses). Its elites of revolutionary cadres, who were primarily Jewish and ex-Zionists, for personal, political, and ideological reasons, zealously carried out their anti-Zionist mission, in a frequently committed, dedicated and violent manner, surpassing, in all probability, any conceivable non-Jewish Communist anti-Zionist activity. As Professor L. Schapiro has observed:

“In general, Jewish Party members were as much if not more opposed to the fostering of Jewish nationalism and to Zionism than non-Jewish members.”

In addition, as previously pointed out, the Comintern had the benefit of the help rendered whole-heartedly by the Yevsektsia, a body composed of vast numbers of Jewish Communist personnel in various propaganda as well as other related agencies of the Comintern, from which recruits for the struggle against Zionism in Palestine were drawn.

All these organizational resources with their prolific activities were of a political nature. Their main purpose was to undermine Zionist political aims, demoralize its following, and inflict a mortal blow upon the flickering hopes of the revival of a Jewish national home in Palestine.

The struggle against Zionism, however, was not only an ideological or political issue but indeed was to become a security matter of a very high priority. Zionism was not just another outside national movement in an area dominated by a native and reactionary nationalist bourgeoisie. Rather it was a nationalist movement of a progressive social democratic nature, whose birthplace and hence ethnic and cultural roots lay in Russia proper. The majority of Russian Jews gave it strong emotional support, and between them were also strong family bonds. The whole future of Zionism depended upon this human reservoir of Russian Jewry, and particularly upon its numerous Zionist pioneering organizations.

It was this unusual blend of alien and rival political affiliations (social democracy) of Russian émigrés, building a base for the hopefully coming waves of Russian immigrants, that turned Zionism in general and the rise of Zionist settlement in Palestine in particular, with its worldwide connections with the Western powers and support into a serious security matter. As such, Zionism was dealt with by the appropriate security organs of the Soviet system…“ pp.67-68)

There, with crystal clarity, the entire basis of the opposition between Zionism and Communism is laid bare. Both movements were Jewish; both were Marxist in their essence. The difference was that the Zionists wanted their Jewish Communist paradise in Palestine rather than Russia. The Jewish Communists feared Zionism because it threatened to siphon off the Jewish Marxist masses of Russia to Palestine, thereby endangering Communist rule in Russia. The Zionists also had strong ties to the western capitalists who were sponsoring Zionism in Palestine through the British Empire and its Balfour Declaration. Therefore the Zionists, although brother Marxists, had to be suppressed. Between 1920 and 1924 about 4000-5000 Zionists were arrested and prosecuted by the Soviet authorities. In 1922 an arrangement was concluded between the Soviet agency Yevkom and the Joint Distribution Committee in America whereby the Yevkom and the JDC would collaborate in moving these Zionists to Palestine. The Yevkom would bring the deportees to the border and the Joint Distribution Committee would reroute them to Palestine. In the early days of the Soviet revolution in the 1920’s there was quite a traffic in Jews back and forth between Palestine and Bolshevik Russia. One famous example was the founder of Poale-Zion, Dov Ber Borochov, who returned to revolutionary Russia from Palestine to help organize the Red Brigades of Leon Trotsky. Another notable example was “Professor” Y. Meirson who expressed the hope in the 1920’s “that the Red Army (would) cross the Caucasus and the Taurus and (would) bring to them a Soviet Palestine.” Meirson later returned to Soviet Russia to become a professor of Yiddish literature. Israel Shohat was the founder of the famous Hashomer defense organization for Jews in Palestine. His wife Mania Shohat was a member of the Communist Workers Battalion and, during World War Two, worked for the League V, an organization devoted to raising military aid for the Soviet Union.

Readers interested in the intricate intertwining of Communism and Zionism in Palestine may consult Mr. Hen-Tov’s deeply researched study. It would be fair to say that the Jewish Communists resisted Zionism domestically while finding it useful for promoting revolution in Palestine because of its shared Marxist ideals. That is, of course, an oversimplification. The Communist Party line zigzagged constantly, particularly on such a touchy subject as Zionism. Nevertheless, that is as succinct a distillation of the subject as can be formulated. Zionism was never the identical twin of Communism but it was born of the same revolutionary mother in the womb of Zion.

Well, well. How will Mr. Pizza face respond to the latest posting?The quotation is 100% accurate. The quotation is from a reputable Israeli scholar who is not known to be a “self-hating” Jew. The information is consistent with what other Jewish scholars say. Hmmm.

I know.Let’s say that John Thames has psychological problems. Let’s claim that he suffers from pathological Jew hatred. Let’s dismiss the research volumes as “musty old books”. Let’s claim that he fantasizes about 12 year old girls. Let’s argue about when the income tax came in or the location of Arabian ports. But never, ever, try to deal with the issue at hand. Oh, no! That would lose the debate instantly.

If that doesn’t work, claim there is no debate. Deny the documented facts and accuse the adversary of having an “obsession”. All these tactics, and many more, are routinely used by two dick brains who would be laughed out of any real debate conducted by enforceable rules.

BROTHERLY QUARRELS

The old Soviet antagonism toward Zionism was something of a brotherly quarrel. The Communists were always sympathetic toward the Zionists in one sense because the Zionists were brother Marxists. Dov Berochov, Y.Meirson and many other Zionist pioneers were enthusiastic advocates of “scientific socialism” and communal living. The problem was that the Zionists wanted their Communist paradise in Palestine rather than Russia. This presented a problem for the Communists. To allow Zionism would create a dual loyalty problem, inducing hundreds of thousands of Communist Jews to be more loyal to Palestine to Moscow. Moreover, the mass emigration of Jews to a foreign land would destabilize a Communist regime in Russia heavily dominated by Jews. Thus, Zionism was harshly suppressed. Zionist periodicals were banned and the use of the Hebrew language was proscribed. Some Zionist activity was permitted until the late 1920’s provided that it aided, rather than conflicted with, Communist objectives. Thus, a traffic in Jews between Palestine and the Jewish Communist agricultural colonies in the Crimea on the north shore of the Black Sea was tolerated. Some Zionists convicted of crimes against the Soviet state were released from prison and allowed to go to Palestine with the assistance of the Joint Distribution Committee.

Zionism was always heresy in the Soviet system of values. But it was a special kind of heresy because it was the heresy of the Jewish Communist ruling class. Zionism was a ‘Progressive Social Democratic” movement – and was heresy because of geographical, not ideological reasons.

http://en.metapedia.org/wiki/List_of_communist_Jewshttp://en.metapedia.org/wiki/List_of_communist_Jews

A face is worthh a thosand words.

http://en.metapedia.org/wiki/List_of_communist_Jews

http://samsonblinded.org/blog/commis-are-jewish.htm

Here is an Israeli Jew who tells it exactly like I tell it – Jews were and are Communists – and most of the pioneers to the Zionist pre-state were Russian Communists. I win – again.

Now Ronnie and Fang – get down on your knees and blow each other – while chanting “Heil Thames!”

Pizza face, pizza face, wherefore art thou. o pizza face? Your revisionist Romeo misses you. Have you had too many facts shoved up your ass? Would a pound of flesh down at the reparations office suit you better?

Fret not, pizza face. More iconvenient facts await you.The unpleasant truth shall serenade you evermore, until you collapse into the bosom of eternal verity.

From
“A Gas Chambers Dream”
Rewritten by Puck

That pretty gay, and sad that your life revolves around me.

Maybe you should go off in search of your Trippetta, he hasn’t been around in a while either.

“Gay” means a light hearted, care free person, not a male cocksucker and ass fucker, which is what I suspect you are. I can be afford to be gay because I have money, you don’t. Not merely do I have money; I have overflowing knowledge with which to mock thee.

The Bard of Revisionism

Oh my goodness gracious!

Leonard Bernstein was a Jewish Red! He had all kinds of Communist front citations. He sponored a couple of concerts opposing the deportation of German-Jewish Communist spymaster Hans Eisler from the U.S.; he was a sponsor of a Soviet-American Music friendship society; he was a member of the Hollywood Communist Progressive Citizens of America and he supported the reelection of black Communist Congressman Benjamin Davis from Harlem.

Lennie would be the perfect choice to butt fuck Fang while singing “Maria”. Too bad he is serenading Puerto Ricans in the workers paradise in heaven . He should be bulldozing Palestinians down on earth.

Gaskammer doesn’t mean gas chamber.
Pedophile doesn’t mean sex with 12 year old children.
And I am gay for Fangbeer.

I miss him.

I miss Ronnie too. He is like Lennie Bernstein. “I feel Commie, I feel Commie, I feel pretty and Commie and gay…”

http://www.codoh.com/gcgv/gcvergas.html

Lessons in German terminology for adolescent punks.

http://www.codoh.com/gcgv/gcvergas.html

http://mycatbirdseat.com/2011/03/anthony-lawson-holocaust-hate-speech-were-the-germans-so-stupid/

30 minute video for dummies.

WEST SIDE STORY IS EAST SIDE PROPAGANDA

West Side Story is supposed to be a classic movie. And so it is, although for a reason much different than most people think. West Side Story is pure Communist propaganda. It is the Marxist lie that all races are equal and that there is no wrong in racial crossing. Most people have no idea that such doctrines are purely Communist in nature. But they are. Almost every major figure in the film’s production was both a Communist and a Jew. Let’s begin with the composer, Leonard Bernstein. Bernstein, starting in the late 1940’s, had major Communist front citations to his name. He sponsored two concerts for the defense of the Communist spy chief (and brother Jew) Gerhardt Eisler. Bernstein also sponsored the reelection of the black Communist Congressman from Harlem, Benjamin Davis. He enlisted in the Progressive Citizens of America, the Hollywood Communist front organization. And, just to extend his “brotherly love” activities into all spheres, he promoted American-Soviet friendship in music.

Was Red Lennie alone in his endeavors? Why, hardly. Jerome Robbins, the first director of the film, was an “ex” Jewish Communist. Robbins had carefully ratted on some (but not all) of his Jewish comrades in the film industry to placate Congress. Arthur Laurents, the playwright, traveled consistently in the red orbit. He was also a flaming homosexual, like Bernstein and Robbins. Thus, the screenwriter, the director and the composer were all Jewish Communists. West Side Story will never play in Israel where the Palestinian Arabs would die laughing. It was designed only to get white Americans to allow the Third World into America. In that, it surely succeeded. The problem is that no one is singing Maria anymore.

West Side Story will never play in Israel where the Palestinian Arabs would die laughing.

http://www.israel-opera.co.il/eng/?CategoryID=337&ArticleID=699

As usual, Ronnie dummie focuses on the ireelevancies while ignoring the point. Care to refute Bernstein’s Communist front citations ? Or do you prefer to leave that to pizza brain?

WHY MY NAME IS RONNIE DUMB SHIT

Why am I called “Ronnie Dumb Shit” folks? Well actually, it’s easy. I’m called that because I’m a bullshit artist. There is this guy John Thames, who has done all kinds of research that I’ve n ever heard of. He reads all these university texts I haven’t and he makes me look like the complete idiot I am. So I’ve come up with this technique. I don’t have to write even a paragraph, much less an essay. (Actually, I can’t do either because I never learned to write.)

Instead, I look for a sentence or two that I can show to be wrong. Usually, it has nothing to do with the subject. So if Thames proves that Jews from around the globe were congregating in Paris 1919 to pursue agendas like minorities treaties and a mandate over Palestine, I find an introductory sentence where he says the income tax came in permanently after WW1. Now, of course, this has nothing to do with whether the Jews were doing what Thames said they were doing at Paris. But it allows lying, stupid shit little me to argue about something that doesn’t matter. Actually, of course, the previous income taxes were temporary and frequently declared unconstitutional by the Supreme Court. So even on that one I’m wrong. But so what? The idea is to snipe at Thames because if I face him on the real facts I get bulldozed.

Now my side kick is named PIZZA FACE. He is just as dumb as I am but slightly more sophisticated.
If Thames writes that Jews were the founders and progenitors of modern socialism, PIZZA FACE, with his Google search instant knowledge, will go “Aha! Gotcha! The real founders of socialism were the Fouriests in France who weren’t Jewish.” True enough, but then he ignores that for the rest of the 19th century Jews in all countries were the leaders of socialist movements and that the leading commissars in the world’s first socialist empire, Soviet Russia, were overwhelmingly Jewish.

In short, PIZZA FACE confuses debating skills with real knowledge. These are the pathetic imbeciles with whom John Thames toys with every posting. Kicking fatso PIZZA FACE and adolescent jerk off RONNIE DUMB SHIT in the balls and stoping them into dust really does get a little boring. For a debate to be interesting requires worthy opponents. Since I cannot find opponents on my own level, I must beat up on these two morons instead.

RONNIE DUMB SHIT AND PIZZA FACE REFUTE THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPAEDIA

Hello there people. Now just to prove that John Thames is wrong I’m going to find an incorrect sentence in the Jewish Encyclopaedia and thereby prove that Jews had nothing to do with Communism Now just watch me show how sloppy those kikes are with facts and how Jews really had nothing to do with it. Just you watch!

http://www.white-history.com/hwr61i.htm

And remember, if you don’t believe me my friend PIZZA FACE will prove that Jews didn’t create Communism by proving that Charles Fourier was not a Jew.

RONNIE DUMB SHIT SAYS:

Now pay attention people. Don’t let that sneaky John Thames confuse you. Read those sentences that say that Communism was widespread in Jewish communities and that Communists deliberately concealed their real Jewish names so as not to give people like John Thames the wrong idea that Communism was really a Jewish movement. And be sure you eat your pizza while reading it, too.

WALTER DURANTY’S PULITZER PRIZE

Mr. Sulzberger of the New York Times has objected to returning Walter Duranty’s Pulitzer Prize on the grounds that this would be “Stalinist” rewriting of history. Mr. Sulzberger’s forebears did not object to Stalinist lying on the front page of their newspaper when Walter Duranty was lying through his teeth about the Ukrainian famine of 1932-1933. But now Mr. Sulzberger objects to “Stalinist” revocation of an undeserved prize in the interests of mere truth. The Talmudic dialectics are most amusing. The technical objection to the revocation of Duranty’s Pulitzer is, of course, that it was granted in 1931, two years before Duranty lied about the great famine. However, in a general sense, Walter Duranty was awarded the Pulitzer Prize for lying in the service of Jewish-Bolshevik Russia. Thus, his lying about the famine two years later was merely a continuation of his previous years of service to an alien cause.

Walter Duranty has gone down in history as the greatest of all liars. The reputation is really undeserved. Duranty lied prodigiously, of course, but he was hardly unique. He was merely the prototype of a huge legion of liars. Was Duranty really a bigger liar than, say, Sidney Webb and his wife Beatrice with their nonsensical, “Soviet Russia, a New Civilization?” Was he a bigger liar than the journalist Louis Fisher or did Duranty simply have a greater opportunity than the equally enthusiastic Fisher? Duranty’s denial of the great Ukrainian famine was not really a greater achievement than the praise of the entire American media for the film “Mission to Moscow” in which Jack and Harry Warner with the collaboration of ambassador Joseph Davies white washed Joseph Stalin and his purge trials, in particular. Again, was Duranty a bigger liar than the entire American media that attacked and destroyed the now confirmed Senator Joseph McCarthy?

Walter Duranty was a thoroughly despicable individual. But he did no differently than the Jews, who have lied for seven decades through one kangaroo trial after another about non-existent “gas chambers”. Duranty did not lie about non-existent “weapons of mass destruction”. He did not feign surprise on December 7, 1941 or concoct an Operation Northwood to provoke war with Cuba either. Does any of this justify Walter Duranty? Of course not. It merely makes him one of many agents of an alien power. And that is the point. Walter Duranty was a symbol of something far more sinister than his own prostitution. He was a symbol of Jewish power demanding obeisance from its gentile whores. Had Duranty not lied through his teeth, some other whore would have. Walter Duranty set an example that all journalists have followed since. He proved that fame and fortune await those who serve Jewish agendas. In Duranty’s day, that meant singing the praises of the Jewish commissars. Today, that means singing the praises of Zionist Israel.

Walter Duranty never knew Rick Sanchez or Helen Thomas. But he knew better than to cross the power that rewarded him. He rose to prominence on a foundation of lies. That foundation is as firm today as it ever was.

Ah gee, Ronnie and Pizza Face have given up. No more sophistries in their bag of tricks shall help them.

THE TIMIDITY OF THE IVORY TOWER

Academicians pose as fearless investigators of the truth. Strict objectivity is their credo. It sounds good. Unfortunately, it is bullshit. Academicians are basically servants of official truth. One need merely look at the 09/11 story to see what prostitutes they are. The fact that the physicist, Steven Jones, was forced from his tenured position at Brigham Young University merely reinforces their intellectual timidity. 09/11, of course, is merely the latest example of their gutlessness. As a general rule, academics are completely afraid of stepping outside the intellectual mainstream. They are deathly afraid of conspiracy theories and anything that varies from a strictly limited version of acceptable thought.

Not merely are academics whores, they are as resistant to truth when they are proven wrong as a virus is to many anti-biotics. Again and again, these ivory tower charlatans have resisted the truth for decades before grudgingly admitting that the people they derided as heretics may have been on to something. Just look at the English historian David Irving. Again and again Irving has aced and humiliated the academic historians with his superior research skills. He documented, long before the academic historians were willing to admit it, that Winston Churchill was a drunk, a military incompetent, a man in the pay of Jewish interests, a man who prolonged a war that Hitler was willing to stop and a man who destroyed the British Empire. Irving’s reward for his efforts was to be financially destroyed by a rigged verdict in a kangaroo court. It was Irving who discovered a documented record of a phone conversation in which he told one of his subordinates, Hans Lammerer, how Hitler wanted the “Jewish Question” solved until the end of the war. Irving also candidly admits that the forensic tests of the so called “gas chambers” do not support the Holocaust myth.

David Irving would never get tenure at a major university because he would be a daily rebuke to the incompetence of his fellows. Academics during the First World War swallowed wholesale the fiction that there was a vast German conspiracy to conquer the world. They willingly enlisted as intellectual prostitutes in George Creel’s Committee of Public Information. They encouraged citizens to spy on each other and violated every civil liberty in the book. When the revisionist historians proved in the mid-1920’s that German “sole guilt” for the war was a fiction, the Anglophile historians swallowed in astonishment. They could not disprove the revisionists but they refused to believe. They were no different than the Van Pelts and Richard Evans of the present who just cannot, and will not believe, that the Holocaust Deniers are right. These academics have claimed for decades that Franklin Roosevelt was “surprised” at Pearl Harbor. The surprise is really on them although they have still not figured it out. On and on it goes.

Academics are the voodoo doctors of political theology. They are penguins in tuxedos who puff their chests and flap their wings at any who point out what they conceal. Like the prostitute, they suck, serve and swallow, and raise their eyes in adoration to the sex organ of propaganda they ardently fellate in the service of truth.

Why, the bullshit boys have grown silent again.

Are they runing up the white flag? Or are they just pulverized by overwhelming factual knowledge and incomparable analytical ability?

FAMILY SQUABBLES

Anyone who reads the history of Communism and Zionism discovers very quickly that the two rival movements were in competition for the solution of the “Jewish question”. Again and again, the Communists would attempt to demonstrate that “scientific socialism” was a better alternative for Jews than Zionism. Just a few quotations from the Comintern (the Communist Third International) should suffice to demonstrate the point.

“The miserable results of the Zionist efforts and their complete fiasco can be seen particularly clearly when one compares them with the great speed with which the Jewish working masses in the Soviet Union are taking up agriculture.”

“While Zionism formerly was able to record only trifling successes in regard to settlements, this sphere of work is now entirely closed to it. To this is to be added the fact that another country, the country of the proletarian dictatorship has shown how the national question can be really solved, and with it also the Jewish question.

With scarcely a fraction of the huge sums which Zionism has squandered, the Soviet Union has achieved in a few years, on a sound socialist basis, far more than Zionism has accomplished on an unsound basis, in the course of decades in regard to the settlement of Jews.”

“If we add that the agrarisation activity of the Soviet Government in Russia has done much more in two years for the solution of the Jewish question on that territory than Zionism has effected in fifty years, and that the healthy development of the Jewish colonies in the Soviet Union affords such an attraction for many of the disappointed Jewish emigrants to Palestine, that they are anxious to return to the Soviet Union by the hundreds, it may serve as an indication as to where the Jewish masses, who have hitherto been dazzled by Zionism, must turn to find escape from national and social oppression.”

As these quotations clearly indicate, the Communists and the Zionists were both wooing the “Jewish vote”. The wooing ultimately culminated in Joseph Stalin’s “Palestine in Siberia” called Birobidzhan. But at this point in history, the early to mid-1920’s, the Communist international was seducing the Zionists with the lure of the Jewish Communist agricultural colonies in the Crimea. These colonies had been established by the KOMZERT and the OMZERT, the Communist agencies for the resettlement of the Jews on the land. The Communists and the Zionists both pursued a policy of “normalizing” the Jews by weaning them away from commerce and trade and converting them into toilers of the land. Thus, the conflict between the Communists and the Zionists was based on shared proletarian ideals but divergence over which location was to be preferred, Russia or Palestine.

At the time it looked like the Communists had a pretty good argument. Zionism was, indeed, involved in some heavy slogging in Palestine. Immigration to Palestine was encountering heavy resistance from the Arabs, as the riots of 1920, 1921 and later 1929 indicated. Immigration was slow in the 1920’s and prospects for an eventual Jewish state did not look good. Thus, quite a few disillusioned Zionists did return to Russia in the 1920’s, reinforcing the view of the British Mandatory authorities that the Communist and Zionist movements were intertwined. In the end Zionism succeeded and Communism failed. But for a long time it looked as though the odds favored the Jewish Communists. Such were the political struggles of the Communists versus the Zionists. Those struggles are still very interesting to read as they reveal connections many would like to forget.

INGLORIOUS PAPACY

Pope Ratzinger has written a book defending the Jews from the charge of murdering Jesus. His argument is that “Judeans” does not mean all the Jews. Just who does it mean, then? Are we to believe that it was the non-Jewish elements of the Judean population who wanted Jesus crucified? Who did Jesus offend, the Jewish Sanhedrin or the Galilean peasant population? Who demanded his death when they rejected Barrabas and chose Jesus to condemn? Was it the Gauls who invaded Turkey south to Palestine in 275 B.C. who demanded that? Or was it the Jewish mob?

Pope Rat Poison has a very interesting theological mind. One suspects that his theology comes from a crematory oven burning anti-Jewish Christian heresies. Either that, or he intends for his rewrite of the New Testament to be produced in Hollywood as “Inglorious Papacy”.

Pizza face, o pizza face, where art thou? Cans’t thou at least accuse me of misquoting Jewish reference works? Has “The Jew of the Debate Boards” taken refuge in Malta? Christopher Marlowe would be ashamed of you.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eduard_Bloch

Hitler’s “good Jew”, Dr. Edouard Bloch, who treated his mother, Klara, for cancer. Note Bloch’s comments on the good behavior of the allegedly insane Adolf as a youth.

CORPORATE AMERICA

Corporate America once created the highest standard of living ever seen to American workers. It invested its money in building American industry and raised wages accordingly. It created a land of superabundance and unlimited opportunity. But that corporate America is gone. The new corporate America invests its money overseas and destroys the standard of living of white Americans. It has no loyalty to any country and thinks only of its own profits. In the process it devastates national economies and once productive citizens.

This corporate America is an abomination. It has abandoned the old system of family wage. It no longer pays a man enough to support a wife and family. It pays two people less than it used to pay one. This corporate America must be destroyed. It must be replaced by a national economy where American prosperity and American jobs are the paramount consideration. Shipping any American production facility or American job overseas for any reason must be codified as treason to America and punished accordingly. If American workers cannot be found to fill jobs they must be trained. No hiring of foreign workers on HB-1 visas shall be tolerated.

If corporate America does not like this, that is too bad. Andrew Carnegie, Henry Ford and Henry Dow were ruthless businessmen but they hired American workers and made their money in America. J.P. Morgan was a Wall Street financier but he did not work for Goldman Sachs. Henry Ford not merely made the Model-T, he wrote “The International Jew” and published the Dearborn Independent. If corporate America puts the “corporate” before the “American”, they should be dealt with exactly as Jews who put Israel before America. No other standard shall do.

REVOLUTIONARY PRINCIPLES

Americans still imagine that they can work within the system to save themselves. They have not yet caught on to the fact that their government and their economy are run by anti-white traitors dedicated to their destruction. America cannot be saved by voting Democratic or Republican. Both parties are anti-white. Nor can America be saved by establishing a third party. Such a party, even if it could obtain power, a most unlikely possibility, would be nullified by the courts and the power of the media.

No, it is much too late in the day for such efforts. Ron Paul and his followers mean well but they are whistling in the wind. White America can only be saved through revolution. Revolution does not mean writing essays or engaging in debate. It does not mean getting on the radio or arguing with media commentators. It means violence and killing. Who shall the revolution target? It shall target the racial aliens – and those who let them in. The racial aliens are the Mexicans, the Hispanics generally and the Asians. Who let them in? Primarily the Jews who regard white racial homogeneity as a threat to their own dominance and corporate interests who wish to lower their labor costs. The politicians who do the bidding of the Jews and the corporations must also be targeted.

The revolution is not interested in taking prisoners. It is interested only in securing America for whites only. Those who have betrayed white America deserve no mercy. They shall receive none.

THE COMINTERN ON PALESTINE

The Communist Third International always opposed Zionism in Palestine on the grounds that the Zionists were plotting to dispossess the legitimate Arab inhabitants of the land. For once, the Communists were telling the truth. That was indeed the intent of the Zionists, since fulfilled. However, the Communists never succeeded in convincing the Arabs that Communism was a good thing. The Arabs remained convinced that Zionism was ideologically closely related to Communism, which indeed it was. Mr. Jacob Ten-Hov has this to say on the subject in “Communism and Zionism in Palestine” on p.96.

“…The Arabs looked with disfavor upon the Zionist immigrants who came to Palestine for they were people ‘whose ideas and habits (were) influenced by the social and Bolshevik principles which they (brought) with them…a strong Bolshevik element has already established itself in the country and has produced an effect on the population…’ Jamal Husseini, Secretary of the Arab Higher Committee, in testimony before the Royal Commission in 1937, confirmed these fears in the following words: As to the communistic ideas and principles of the Jewish immigrants – most repugnant to the religious customs and ethical principles of this country.”

The fears of the Arabs were solidly grounded in the facts. The Comintern and Communist propaganda generally in this period simultaneously denounced Zionism while trying to woo the Zionist settlers to return to the Jewish Communist Soviet Union. As Hen-Tov writes:

“On frequent occasions, the Comintern called upon the Jewish masses to abandon the ‘Zionist hell’ and to migrate back to their respective countries of origin. It has already been mentioned that in 1925, the Soviet Government inaugurated the A.G.R.O. organization to promote the migration of Jewish workers from abroad into the Jewish agricultural settlements in the Soviet Union. A strong attempt was also made, though without much success, to attract Zionist workers from Palestine. Somewhat later on, a leitmotif in the Comintern’s literature can readily be detected, that of the counsel that ‘the best thing the Jewish workers could do would be to quit Palestine altogether.’”

The attempts of the Party to oppose Zionism while encouraging Jewish loyalty to Communism led to many difficult situations. When the Party opposed the Zionists over the Wailing Wall riots of 1929, large numbers of Jews quit the Party in disgust over its anti-Zionist position. This mass resignation took place at precisely the same time that Joseph Stalin was sponsoring his Birobidzhan project, “Palestine in Siberia”, to woo Jewish loyalties back to Communism. The loss of Jewish comrades was so severe that when the 1936-1939 Arab uprising against British rule and Zionism in Palestine erupted, the Party took an entirely different line. Then the Party placated its Jewish members by arguing that both the Arab and Jewish workers should unite against the real enemy, the capitalist British.

As the creation of the Jewish state approached in 1948, the Party began to proclaim that Jews could be equally loyal to either the Jewish Autonomous Region called Birobidzhan or to the impending state of Israel. A period of rapprochement between Zionism and Communism existed in 1947 and 1948. The Soviet ambassador to the U.N., Andrei Gromyko, advocated partition of Palestine into Arab and Jewish states. The Party adopted a pro-Zionist position and condemned the “mistakes and errors of the past” (i.e., the anti-Zionism of 1929). Zionism was now compatible with Soviet objectives. The Soviet Union formally recognized Israeli statehood just after the United States did. Many thousands of Communist Jews poured down through the Balkans with Stalin’s permission to invade Arab Palestine. Jacob Berman in Poland and Ana Pauker in Romania enthusiastically aided in this process. The Zionists got the weapons they needed to win the war against the Arabs from the Communists in Czechoslovakia. The Czechs trained Jewish pilots at Zatec airfield and provided them with captured German Messerschmidts.

The romance of Stalin with ideologically deviationist Zionists did not last long. The Party soon returned to its traditional anti-Zionist position, especially after Israel aligned itself with the west in 1953. Nevertheless, a great many of the Zionist immigrants to Palestine have retained their essentially Marxist outlook to this day. Portraits of Lenin and Trotsky adorn the walls of their collective farms. These well established facts of the past have generally gone down the memory hole by common consent. The Jews, who have always been at great pains to deny the Jewish background of Communism, naturally do not want it recalled. The conservatives, the darlings of the right wing revisionist Zionists, do not want to talk about it either. Israel is supposedly the ally of the United States and such disreputable facts do not look good on the resume.

Come on, pussy boys. Get your dicks out of each others mouths and fight back. You can do it. Fang will have to take off his apron and do some research, instead of making spaghetti for his corporate girlfriend.

SINGING DIXIE

There is an unfortunate tendency in the American right wing to glorify the old South. This view is based on a purely romantic and uninformed view of the plantation “civilization”. The South before the war was totally anachronistic. Its economy was agricultural, based on slave labor and completely unsuited to an emerging industrial nation. Had it been allowed to survive, the unification of the United States as the greatest industrial power of the mid-nineteenth to mid-twentieth century would have been impossible. Before the war, there was great controversy over so-called “free” versus slave states. It was a question of primary political importance for the dominance of either the north or south. The United States could not have survived half free and half slave. The South had to go for the future development of the nation.

It is idle to argue over whether the destruction of slavery and southern political independence could have been achieved without the war. The fact is that the attempted compromises failed and the issue came down to force, as it usually does. Southerners singing Dixie always live in a fantasy world of states rights and strict constitutionality where the ugly realities of big power politics are never allowed to interfere with the reveries. Let’s examine what these Southerners ignore. If the South had succeeded in breaking up the United States into two nations, then the only half formed U.S. would have been at the mercy of the European powers and their balance-of-politics ploys. The French were in Mexico at this time under Maximillian. A divided U.S would have allowed the French to block U.S. expansion westward across the Mississippi. They could have formed an alliance with either the North or the Confederacy to block either of the two U.S. powers from moving into lands coveted by the French. The British Empire, world famous for playing one rival off against another, could have done the same, provoking either the North or the South and then picking up the pieces. (And, indeed, during the Civil War itself the British considered intervening to aid the South militarily.) No one knows how these imperial scenarios would have played out but a divided U.S. would have been very susceptible to such schemes.

Confederates with misty eyes simply assume that the Confederacy, once established, would have avoided all these snares. Presumably the great General Lee and the glorious Army of Northern Virginia would have solved all problems, as they did at Appamatox. The lack of reality in this kind of thinking is amazing. The old problem of “free” versus slave states would also have reemerged after a southern victory. If the United States had been allowed to expand westward despite the intervention of the British and French, then every new state or territory would have been up for grabs, exactly as before the war. The old struggle would have reemerged, threatening to revive the war once more. In short, the Confederate Southerners are kidding themselves.

There is no doubt whatever that the great War Between the States greatly accelerated government power and led to other undesirable results, as great wars always do. But the fact of the matter is that the North was right. A Confederate victory would have had disastrous results for the future of America. It is idle to object that the South was only seceding as their forefathers seceded from England. There is no logical consistency in politics. The Confederacy had to go. Secession is not the solution to present day American problems either. The solution to darkening America is not to retreat from the racial invasion by “seceding”. The solution is to fight for every inch of the land to preserve the Union. And if it takes William Tecumseh Sherman to burn Mexico city to the ground and scorch the earth of La Raza, so much the better.

OLIVER SCHMUCKWELL

Oliver Schmuckwell was one of the greatest of Englishmen. His fame rests on his capacity for exterminating Irishmen. Schmuckwell, like many of the great mass murderers of history, was a God fearing man. He learned the piety of violence from the Jewish Old Testament. There he read how the Hebrews of old slaughtered the Caanites without distinction of age or sex. They slew in the name of the Lord – and Schmuckwell did the same. Oliver Schmuckwell never doubted his divine right to kill anyone who opposed the British Empire. Irishmen were exactly like Palestinian Arabs – impediments to the right to rule. Oliver Schmuckwell thought so highly of the Jews that he once proposed to replace English with Hebrew as the official language of the English people. It is too bad that Schmuckwell lived before America-Israel-Public-Affairs Committee. Had he merely lived in Arthur Balfour’s time, no doubt he would have proposed a Jewish “national home” in Ulster to Mannaseh-ben-Israel.

Oliver Schmuckwell was the Lazar Kaganovich of Irish famine. He thought nothing of stealing estates and leaving the former owners to starve on the rocks. His version of Deir Yassein was bayoneting Irish babies at Drogheda. Oliver Schmuckwell was the “scientific capitalist” liquidator of the Irish bourgeoisie. He brought “democracy” to Ireland via absentee land lord crop exporting – just like Jews exporting shekels to Israel while Gaza starves.

FEMINISM AND THE FALL OF ROME

Feminism is not a new thing. Neither is it a sign of progress, as some imagine. It has flourished in the past with results as disastrous as presently. Many parallels exist between the feminist movement in the Roman Empire and the feminist movement of today. In the early days of the Republic, Rome was extremely patriarchal. The father, the paterfamilias, held the power of life and death over his wife and children. This system lasted until roughly the end of the Second Punic war against Carthage. Then began a vast movement for the “liberation” of women. The war had, in a sense, been won by women. The Romans had lost the entirety of their manpower in three consecutive defeats at the hands of Hannibal Barcas. The final disaster came at Cannae where 60,000 Romans were surrounded and stabbed in the back.

When women had grown back the dead soldiers and the final defeat of Hannibal was achieved at Zama, Roman women demanded freedom. One of the first concessions granted to them was the repeal of the law against luxury. The repeal of this law allowed Roman women to flaunt their wealth in public. No longer did they have to practice frugality as matron of the household. Next they acquired the right to participate as gladiators in the Forum, the right to enter minor political office and the right to practice infanticide and abortion. The Roman birth rate plummeted and vice and corruption spread among Roman men. A general strike against marriage ensued and the Emperor Augustus tried to revive reproduction with a bachelor tax. It was all to no avail. The situation became so outrageous that a famous Roman remarked that “We Romans, who rule the world, are ruled by our women.” The poet Juvenal remarked that the Roman aristocracy “divorced to marry and married to divorce”.

At the same time that this female liberation was taking place the Empire was overrun by swarms of slaves and racial aliens. Like many European cities today, it became difficult to find a genuinely Roman face in Rome. Diversity, like feminism, greatly contributed to the fall of the Empire. By Empire’s end, the legions which had conquered the world were half Roman and half barbarian (rather like the American army today, where increasing numbers of Third Worlders proliferate). When Rome fell, the female irresponsibility which had so greatly contributed to the Empire’s downfall made a severe impression on the fathers of the Christian Church. They made a point to yoke females and to impose the virtue of chastity. Given what they had witnessed during the fall of Rome the misogynist viewpoint of the early Christian elders can hardly be criticized.

The parallels of all this to modern day America can hardly be disputed. Although America is not Rome the same trends, particularly that of the female unleashed, are evident. Women, throughout history, are either the bedrock of a social structure or the dissolvers of the social structure. In early America, as in early Rome, women were baby makers and home makers. In latter day America, as in latter day Rome, women are imitation men and unborn baby killers. The consequences are the same, then as now.

IN DEFENSE OF HONEST ABE

Southern propagandists have presented a generally unfavorable picture of Abraham Lincoln. He has been accused of having provoked the war, of interfering with a divine right of secession and of being a hypocrite on the subject of slavery. All of this is demonstrably untrue. Lincoln’s position on slavery was consistently misrepresented by the press. Lincoln never had the slightest intent of abolishing slavery in the slave states; he only insisted that slavery not be permitted to spread westward. When the northern states passed “free men” laws to prevent the repatriation of escaped slaves, Lincoln sought to repeal such laws so that the slaves could be returned to their rightful owners.

Lincoln was an unabashed white supremacist. Again and again in his Illinois political debates with Stephen Douglas, Lincoln denounced any suggestion that the inferior black race should be placed on an equal footing with the superior white race. He dreaded the thought of racial crossing and feared miscegenation as a threat to the survival of the white race. Lincoln’s statements to this effect are so numerous and well documented, both before, during and after the war, that it is a tribute to historical white wash that his real views have been erased from public consciousness. Early in the war in 1862 Lincoln invited a delegation of black leaders to the White House to listen to his proposals for deporting blacks to the Caribbean or Africa. Honest Abe considered numerous plans along these lines, including a plan to send blacks to the Chiriqui region in Central America, a failed attempt to send them to islands off Haiti and encouraging immigration to Liberia on the west coast of Africa.

Lincoln has received much criticism from Southerners over his Emancipation Proclamation. They denounce it as purely hypocritical, freeing the slaves who were under Southern control but not freeing the slaves who were under Northern control. But this objection misses the point. The Emancipation Proclamation was designed to disrupt the Southern war effort by undermining the loyalties of the blacks who were manning the Confederate arms and munitions industries. In that, it succeeded admirably.

Lincoln continued with his plans for black deportation after the war. He unsuccessfully solicited the British Empire to allow black migration to Guinea and other South American colonies. Lincoln was literally obsessed with solving America’s “Negro problem” and gave it his highest priority until his death by assassination. There were major impediments to Lincoln’s scheme aside from the reluctance of foreign countries to accept black deportees. The radical Republicans wanted to use black voters to intimidate and control the defeated white Southerners. Business leaders of the emerging industrial economy wanted cheap black labor. Lincoln faced a daunting and difficult task. But he was determined that the task should be accomplished – for the future good of white America.

Many legitimate criticisms of Lincoln can be made. He was a wartime dictator, he did suppress civil liberties and the freedom of the press, he did allow Northern armies to commit large scale atrocities. But all this pales beside one fact – Abraham Lincoln was preoccupied with one overriding concern – ridding the white United States of its black plague. Even more than preserving the Union, Lincoln wanted a future America of racially homogeneous whites. Let us consider the problems which would have been avoided had he succeeded. Had blacks been expelled from America, then the hordes of Communist Jews who poured into the United States in the 1880’s would not have been able to use the “Negro problem” to promote their aims. There would not have been a gigantic “Civil Rights” campaign to uplift the Negro from presumed white oppression. There would never have been created a vast government bureaucracy to deal with this so-called problem and no federal interference with state and private property rights Neither would other groups, such as Hispanics and feminists, have been able to jump on the Civil Rights bandwagon. In short, America would be a free white nation. Abe Lincoln was a merciless man in wartime. But there was no reason to suppose that he would have been any less merciful in time of peace. It was Thaddeus Stevens and the radical Republicans who imposed Reconstruction, not Lincoln.

Abraham Lincoln was no saint. But he was a white supremacist, a preserver of the Union and the man who worked harder than any other to solve America’s racial disease. He deserves to be remembered and honored, although for reasons much different from those the Zionist media suggest.

ADOLF HITLER IN VIENNA

When Adolf Hitler was living in the Ratzner’s men’s hotel in Vienna he became very good friends with several of the Jewish residents there, particularly Joseph Neumann and Siegfried Lofner. The young Adolf not merely had many political conversations with these Jews, he personally profited from the associations. One of them was a coppersmith and Hitler used him to market his paintings. Hitler also spent many hours in conversation with Neumann, discussing such things as Herzl’s Zionism. On one occasion, Hitler objected to Kaiser Wilhelm’s removal of a statue that had been erected to the German-Jewish poet, Heinrich Heine. Although Hitler stressed that he did not share Heine’s politics, he thought it wrong not to honor the poetic achievements of a great German.

None of this jibes with the later fiction that Hitler was reflexively anti-Jewish. It is, of course, true that Hitler was a great admirer of Karl Lueger, the anti-Semitic mayor of Vienna. As in the case of Lueger, Lueger’s anti-Semitic bark was worse than his bite. The future Fuehrer also liked to attend performances of Shakespeare’s “A Midsummer Night’s Dream” by Max Reinhardt of whom Hitler was a great admirer. Hitler later marketed the vast majority of his paintings through the Viennese Jewish art dealer, Morgenthau, who sold Hitler’s paintings and sketches to mainly Jewish clients (as revealed by Morgenthau’s card index). Adolf Hitler thought very highly of his family’s Jewish physician, Edouard Bloch, who treated, unsuccessfully, Hitler’s mother, Klara, for breast cancer. In fact, Hitler went on to say that Dr. Bloch was a “good Jew” and that if all Jews were like Dr. Bloch, there would be no “Jewish problem”. Bloch was given special protection by the Gestapo when the Anschluss took place in 1938 before he emigrated to New York, dying in 1945. Bloch’s comments on the young Hitler who accompanied his mother to Bloch’s office are interesting. Doctor Bloch stated that the young Hitler was extremely well behaved, polite and showed no signs of mental disturbance whatever. Moreover, when Hitler’s mother died, Bloch never saw a more distraught individual. While not condoning Hitler’s later policies, Edouard Bloch had nothing but positive memories of Adolf Hitler as a youth.

If Hitler was not originally anti-Semitic, what happened to change his attitudes? As the historians Brigitte Haman and David Irving have demonstrated, Hitler’s attitude change was a direct response to the Jewish involvement in Communism and the post-war betrayal of Germany. The strikes at war’s end which crippled Germany were largely Jewish inspired, as even anti-Hitler writers acknowledge. Communism in the year 1919 in Germany was everywhere Jewish. The three Bavarian Communist upheavals were led by men like Kurt Eisner, Hugo Haas, Ernest Toller, Eugen Levine-Nissen and the revolutionary Jewess, Rosa Luxemberg. Other prominent Communist Jews of the day were Leo Jogisches, Paul Levi, Klara Zetkin and Ruth Fischer. The Brest-Litovsk treaty which ended Germany’s war with Russia was signed, on behalf of Bolshevik Russia, by Trotsky-Bronstein, Joffe and Abramovich. In nearby Hungary, the six month reign of Communist terror, March through August, was run by the Jew Bela Kun. 160 out of 200 of his top commissars were Jewish, including the notorious hangman, Tibor Tzamuelly.

This is what changed Adolf Hitler’s attitudes toward Jews. Hitler’s identification of Jews with Communism was not unique. Virtually everyone of his time made the same identification. The authoress, Cecille Tormay, who wrote the famous autobiographical account of the Hungarian revolution, “An Outlaw’s Diary”, said the same. So did Winston Churchill, in his famous newspaper article, “Zionism versus Bolshevism: A Struggle for the Soul of the Jewish People”. The American State Department overflowed with reports in the early 1920’s on Jewish involvement in Communism. Despite Hitler’s undoubtedly correct view on the Jewish involvement in Communism, he continued to make distinctions between good Jews and bad Jews. When Hitler discovered that his chauffeur, Emil Maurice, may have been a Jew, he personally ordered Maurice converted into an “honorary Aryan”. The early National Socialist regulations made exceptions for Jews who had loyally fought for Germany in the First World War. When the Nuremberg race laws were passed in 1935, Hitler had a major problem because of the huge number of part Jews in the Wehrmacht. He converted over 50,000 of them into “honorary Aryans” to avoid their expulsion from the military. An excellent source on this is “Hitler’s Jewish Soldiers” by Bryan Rigg.

Hitler undoubtedly acted to purge Germany of Jewish influence. His closing down of Jewish businesses and banning of Jews from the professions is proof of this. Yet he continued to be remarkably lenient in many cases. Hitler personally sponsored the career of the part-Jewish soprano, Marguerite Slezak, at the Berlin State Opera. He also managed to overlook the marriages of a great many German artists to Jewish spouses. A classic case in point was the operetta composer, Franz Lehar, who married Lizzy Leon, the daughter of the Viennese Jewish librettist, Victor Leon. A not inconsiderable number of Nazi officials were also of part Jewish ancestry. Reinhard Heydrich, the head of the Czech protectorate, was actually or allegedly the son of a Jewish actor. In the military, part Jews like Lutwaffe General Helmut Wilberg, General Johannes Zukertort, Admiral Bernhard Rogge, Commander Paul Ascher of the battleship Bismarck and the famous General Manstein (Lowenstein) are choice examples of part Jews serving Germany’s National Socialist regime.

Adolf Hitler was not above making deals with those who later denounced him as the source of all evil. One of his first acts as Chancellor of Germany was to conclude the Havaara or Transfer Agreement with the Zionists. By the terms of this agreement approximately 40,000 of Germany’s Jews were sent to Palestine minus an exit tax. This facilitated the Zionist objective of ridding Germany of unwanted Jews while facilitating the Zionist objective of moving Jews to Palestine. Zionist leaders praised Hitler as the man who would preserve the “racial purity of both the Germans and the Jews. It was two Zionist rabbis, Leo Baeck and Joachim Prinz, who helped Hitler formulate his definition of a Jew in the Nuremberg laws. The Nazis founded special Zionist training camps for agricultural pursuits for Jews who wished to go to Palestine. The Nazi press consistently praised the achievements of the Zionists in Palestine and not so subtly suggested that German Jews should emigrate there. The Nazis prepared a special medallion commemorating Zionism and allowed the blue and white flag of Zionism to fly alongside the swastika. It was the only flag beside the swastika to legally fly in the Third Reich.

Today, all these verifiable facts about Adolf Hitler’s intimate relations with Jewry have gone down the historical memory hole. No one wishes to remember that it was the Central Emigration Office of the SS under Adolf Eichmann who loaded Jews onto the boats on the Danube as they sailed to British Mandatory Palestine. Nor does anyone wish to remember Werner Goldberg, the ideal Nazi soldier, who was the half Jewish son of a convert to Lutheranism. Even more forgetful was the little Jewish girl and her mother who used to visit Hitler at Berschtesgaden until 1938. And as for Hedy Lamar’s claim that she had a sexual tryst with Der Fuehrer at the insistence of her half Jewish husband and Nazi arms dealer, Fritz Mandel, the less said the better.

Adolf Hitler, for better or worse, was a thinking man’s anti-Semite. He opposed Jewish influence while acknowledging the good in individual Jews. Since these facts do not comport with the legend that he killed six million Jews in purported “gas chambers”, the facts have generally been buried. To read the suppressed facts is to realize, once again, that history is “a lie agreed upon”.

Where is that dick head Ronnie? Probably giving Pizza Face a Pasta Job.

THE TALMUD RE-EXAMINED

The internet is now overflowing with Jews and rabbis trying to explain away the “misunderstood” and “misquoted” Talmud. As always throughout history the explanations are that the odious passages are mistranslated or taken out of context, among other camouflages and deceptions. Many of these tactics may be seen on You Tube.

Before proceeding with an analysis of these explanations, it would be useful to explain what the Talmud really is. The Talmud is a series of debates on how all the rules and regulations which cover Jewish life are to be interpreted and implemented. The Talmud covers everything from marriage and divorce, to bathing and hand washing rituals, to medicine and healing, to relations with non-Jews, to religious duties, to you name it. These issues frequently revolve around Biblical passages and their interpretation and misinterpretation. The disputations on all these subjects are conducted by various rabbis taking opposing points of view, rather like lawyers arguing their briefs before an appellate court. And this technique provides an excellent cover device for various odious passages in the Talmud. When the offending passage is cited, the Jews can argue that it is only the irate comment of one particular contributor to the Talmud, not the essence of the work as a whole.

The charges against the Talmud throughout the centuries have been that it is severely anti-gentile, that it teaches that non-Jews are animals in human form, that it is permitted for Jews to swindle and cheat non-Jews, that it condones various bizarre sexual practices, including sex with underage children, that it turns the truth upside down through sophistries, that it inverts logic and regulates behavior through absurd regulations, etc. Let us examine in detail how the Jews have responded to these charges from past to present. There is a famous passage in the Talmud where rabbi Simon ben Yohai proclaims: “The best of the gentiles must be killed!” The Jews respond to this passage by arguing that the rabbi was perturbed by witnessing the death of his son at the hands of the Roman emperor, Hadrian. Thus, the rabbis words are a response to personal tragedy, not a formula to be applied to non-Jews generally. But if this were the case, there would be no need to preserve the words for posterity. Moreover, there are many similar passages in the Talmud that cannot be so explained. Frequently these passages involve words for ancient, deceased peoples such as Hittites, Akum, etc. The Jews argue that these are animosities of the past, not the present. In reality, they are code words for gentiles generally. Laws, to have any meaning, must be for the present. To include epithets for ancient peoples in a set of books designed for present day Jews would serve no purpose. Therefore, the references to ancient peoples serve merely as code words for present day gentiles.

The Jews have a long and provable record of deception about their Talmudic scriptures. When the King of France in the 14th century asked the chief rabbi about a passage in the Talmud that referred to Jesus being “boiled in hell for eternity in hot excrement”, the rabbi responded that it was “another Jesus, not Jesus” of Nazareth. The rabbis explanation was rejected by the King, for obvious reasons. Clearly, the Jesus in question was thoroughly hated by the Jews. What Jesus could it have been, if not the Nazarene who tried to convert God’s Chosen to anew faith? When confronted by the famous Talmudic passage about virginity coming back to a three year old girl like a tear coming back to the eye, the Jews explain that this passage is not condoning sex with three year olds as some might imagine, rather the passage merely reflects on what to do if unfortunate abuse occurs. But another Talmudic passage says that: “A maiden aged three years and a day may be acquired in marriage by coition.” If the intent were to prevent child abuse, then why allow marriage to take place at such an early age? Would allowing conjugal rights to sexual intercourse at ages for five and six solve the abuse or permit it to continue?

When the Reformation erupted in the sixteenth century the Jews, believing that the crumbling of the Catholic Church presaged the coming of the Messiah, started publishing unexpurgated editions of the Talmud with the odious passages intact. When this proved premature, the Jews deleted the offending passages, instructing that these harsh anti-gentile dictums were to be transmitted orally only to future generations. If the Talmud is really the innocent, unoffending book the Jews claim it is, there would be no need for such deletions and deceptions.

Many additional examples of odious Talmudic passages could be cited. There are famous passages about gentile women preferring sex with farm animals to sex with their own men folk, to testing women for menstruation by sitting them on wine casks, to resisting help for a drowning gentile, on and on it goes. Whenever confronted with these passages Jews shall invariably argue that such examples are to be narrowly construed in specific circumstances, they are not general rules to be applied to all situations or they will quote a contrary opinion of some rabbi in another section of the Talmud. The great anti-Semite Theodore Fritsch, writing under an assumed name in “The Secret of the Jews Success” stated that the Talmud is like a trap door. It offers so many opinions of a mutually exclusive character that the critic who attempts to prove anything by quoting the Talmud shall be immediately confronted by a passage proclaiming the contrary. This again, is a well established technique of deception, used by liars of all varieties and descriptions, and not just Jews studying the Talmud.

It is well to establish just what function the Talmud plays in relation to the Bible. The Talmud is to the Bible what the Supreme Court is to the Constitution. The Talmud, the oral law of the rabbis consisting of the Mischna and Gemara, is the interpretation of what the Bible “really” means, just as the rulings of the Supreme Court determine what the Constitution “really” means. The Talmud is the ultimate law of the Jews. It is constantly evolving as the “oral law” is whatever the rabbis say it is. The Talmud is an enormously complex volume of work comprising, as it does, over twenty six volumes and tractates. This fact has caused considerable problems for gentile critics of the Talmud in various trials throughout Europe. Typically, the gentile critic of the Talmud, although he may be able to read Hebrew, has not taken the life time of study it would take to master the Talmud as a whole. He only studies the odious anti-gentile passages, of which there are many. Thus, when the critic is cross-examined on the stand by the Jewish defense attorney, he can be shown to be ignorant of many things in the Talmud, and thus his case collapses. This happened to the Greek Orthodox priest, Father Pranaitas at the Belis ritual murder trial in Russia in 1911. It also happened to the Catholic pamphleteer, August Rohling, in the 1860’s. Such tactics do not, of course, rebut the offending passages but the effect on a jury is very striking.

In reviewing the charges against the Talmud and the defenses of it over the centuries, a remarkable consistency may be noted. The passages read the same; the explanations read the same. Nothing ever changes. This remarkable consistency suggests that someone must be right; someone must be wrong. One way of judging the issue would be to examine Jewish credibility on other touchy subjects. One might be the centuries old charge of ritual murder of gentile children leveled against the Jews. Jews have managed to label this charge the “blood libel”, thus denouncing it as beyond the realm of consideration before the charge has even been heard. However, when a professor Ariel Toaff in Israel published his book, “Pasque di Sangue” in Italy arguing that the famous Saint Simon of Trent case from 15th century Italy was a genuine case of Jewish ritual murder, the Jewish defense agencies went ballistic. The ADL in New York ordered all copies of the book destroyed. Professor Toaff was threatened with loss of his pension and career destruction if he did not recant and rewrite his book to “disprove” the blood libel. No one wished to argue his thesis on the basis of the facts.

Many other examples of Jewish dishonesty could be cited. Jews for many decades have promoted the fiction that Arab Palestine was “a land without a people for a people without a land”. Hey have falsely asserted that the Arab refugees of the 1948 war left voluntarily at the urging of their leaders. Today their own historians, such as Benny Morris, llan Pappe and others, have exposed these claims as nothing more than brazen propaganda. Jews long denounced the anti-Semitic “fiction” that Communism was a Jewish movement. But now, Jewish scholars like Henry Felix Srebrnik and Marci Shore, produce volume after volume documenting the overflowing Jewish involvement in same. Jews have very clearly been capable of massive dishonesty on subjects other than the Talmud.

But all this dishonesty pales beside one instance of historical cover up known to all revisionists. That is the hoax of the six million Jews killed in non-existent “gas chambers”. A people who would lie on such a gigantic scale for over half a century would lie about anything. None of this directly touches the nature of the Talmudic teachings. But it raises such fundamental questions regarding Jewish credibility that no thinking individual could possibly doubt that Jews would exercise similar dishonesty about their most sacred scriptures as well.

THE CIVIL WAR RELIGION OF THE ETERNAL SOUTH

The American South has made a historical religion of the great War Between the States. According to this religious mythology/history, if it had not been for the evil North and that satanic man, Abraham Lincoln, states rights and the Constitution would have prevailed forever. This view is naïve in the extreme. Ignored are both the economic and political realities. Slavery was a horribly inefficient system and could not have continued to exist side-by-side an emerging industrial system. The South depended on free trade and cheap imports for its survival. Had the South won the war and the Northern tariff had been abolished, the vast industrial strength of America could never have been built. The “free trade” of the British Empire would have killed it still born.

Equally ignored by these romantic Southerners is the consequence of a divided nation for the future development of America. An America split between the Union and Confederate nations would have been easy pickings for the intervention of the European powers. The French in Mexico could have played North and South against each other to block or hinder U.S. westward expansion, as could have the British Empire. Lincoln’s victory prevented that. The South has complained long and bitterly over the North’s conduct of the war. But the fact is that the Northern armies carefully distinguished between Southerners loyal to the Union and Southern rebels. This distinction may be seen with particular clarity in the treatment of the two Carolinas by the Union armies. One of the most famous atrocities of the war was the burning of Columbia, the capitol of South Carolina. South Carolina had started the war by attacking Fort Sumter. It was a hotbed of secessionist sentiment.

Accordingly, the Northern soldiers behaved harshly. They made it a point to “teach the rebels a lesson”. And they did. However, when the Yankee troops moved into North Carolina the ravages moderated. There had been considerable pro-North sentiment before the war in North Carolina and the soldiers were well aware of this fact. Sherman’s march through Georgia was unquestionably ruthless but not so bad as Southerners maintain. Reading through the memoirs of those who survived it one frequently reads of women’s fears that they would be raped. But documented instances of actual rapes are hard to come by. Ignored in Southerners tales of woe are the abuses of their own troops. Very frequently the outnumbered and outgunned Southern troops “requisitioned” their own citizens. Although movies are not to be taken literally as history there is a representative illustration of this in the 1965 Jimmy Stewart film “Shenandoah”. Early in the film there is a scene where farmer Stewart is confronted by the Confederate cavalry “requisitioning” horses and supplies. Stewart calls the requisitioning the soldiers “code word for stealing”.

In short, Southern civilians were frequently plundered by their own troops more thoroughly than they were by the big, bad Yankees. We previously mentioned that there was considerable pro-Northern sentiment in some of the Southern states, as in North Carolina. The same situation prevailed in other states, such as Kentucky, where two-thirds of the soldiers from that state fought for the Union. As in the Revolutionary War against England, Americans were by no means unified on the issue of secession.

The South has complained, with justice, over its mistreatment during Reconstruction. The Radical Republicans, led by Thaddeus Stevens and Charles Sumner, behaved with extreme vindictiveness. Their vindictiveness was not confined just to Southerners, however. They also successfully impeached, and nearly convicted, President Andrew Johnson for the “crime” of opposing their harsh reconstruction of the South. Even on Reconstruction, however, the South is distorting the facts. They wish to blame the poverty and misery after the war on the “brutality” of the Northern armies and on one William Tecumseh Sherman in particular. But this will not stand up. Most of the damage caused by the war had been repaired within three to four years after war’s end. The real causes of Southern poverty were: (1) the loss of savings invested in Southern bonds and debt instruments which became worthless upon Confederate defeat and (2) the loss of slave labor after emancipation.

The South has never come to grips with the realities of the War Between the States. They refuse to admit to this day that the North was correct to fight to preserve the Union. They will not concede the obsoleteness of their slave economy nor the need for a unified country to fight off European intervention. They forget, too, that they provoked the war by attacking federal property. And they still wish to blame unparalleled Northern brutality in war time for their post-war misery while ignoring the depredations and pillaging of their own troops. In short, they want their “Gone With the Wind” myth, not the cold, hard facts.

One should not be too hard on the South for taking this position. Rather like the Jews wailing over Auschwitz, Southerners refuse to concede that perhaps their own behavior had something to do with the catastrophe that befell them. Southerners also ignore that the Old Confederacy never made the slightest effort to remove from this nation’s midst the enormous black population upon which their slave economy depended. Those efforts were made by Abraham Lincoln both before, during and after the war. Southerners hate Abraham Lincoln as the Devil incarnate but Lincoln was the patriot who worked all his life to try to transport America’s blacks to Liberia on the west coast of Africa, to Chiriqui in Panama, to the island of San Domingo or to any other location he could find for them. The defenders of Southern independence never made any such efforts, then or now.

It is time to put an end to the legend of old Dixie. It was antiquated, backward, an impediment to an emerging industrial nation and a threat to America’s survival in an age of European imperialism. It offered no vision for the future and no solution to the racial plague upon which it built its economy and its way of life. We may honor the memory of the old South, as we honor all things past. No one would wish to banish “Gone With the Wind” from movie theaters as an apology for the old South. People are entitled to their cherished memories. But the historical myth must be destroyed. The Confederacy was obsolete in its own time and must not be revived.

They were outsiders who immigrated to the Olman area via boat, most likely as sailors or passengers on transoceanic voyages that went on for probably hundreds of years.

So they knew the secret of immortality as well?

“these Native American craftsmen had lively imaginations”

A bold statement. But condescending. So they were not artists? ‘Just’ imaginative craftsmen? Are you sure they were men? Is it really your opinion that ancient artists (or craftspeople) were depicting only the products of their imaginations, rather than cultural-historical objects and ideas of importance? Objects such as statuary are rarely products of whimsy, as you suggest.

It’s also an ahistorical statement made to imply a degree of unthinking racism in your subject. Were the Olmecs ‘Native American’? They might come to be considered so, hundreds of years later. But what did they call themselves?

If there’s the possibility that ancient transoceanic travel was going on at the time, there’s the possibility that these imaginative people were carving from life.

My other objection is that the statue head on the left looks to be mongoloid, rather than negroid. It seems you’ve been directed by your source. Have another look and see what you see.

I’m waiting for someone to come up with a role for the Tunguska Event in all of this. Hmm, must call my publisher.

Well, Aprilista. if the head on the left looks mongoloid, that makes sense, because that’s what the Olmecs were. I don’t think anyone has a clue what the Olmecs called themselves – they didn’t leave a written language, unlike the Maya.

Aprilista,

Thank you for such an incisive post. As a parody of self-righteous political correctness and epistemic relativism, it is both subtle and amusing. I especially enjoyed the part about needing to know whether or not these inclusive and ethnocentric Olmec sculptresses considered themselves Native American. (I’m guessing it was an understated reference on those who pander to Native American creation myths.)

“those who pander to Native American creation myths.”

Do you mean those who comprehend the cultures of others?

What creation myths do you prefer people to pander to?

Aprilista,

Do you mean those who comprehend the cultures of others?

No. I mean those who pander to Native American creation myths.

Apologies if I’ve missed the obvious, but I don’t get what you mean by ‘pander to’ in this context.

Re ‘Afrocentric historians’.
Geography doesn’t seem to be a strong point with these charlatans. When you consider that the maritime achievements of the West Africans were so limited that transport to the Cape Verde Islands (discovered by the Portuguese) was beyond them, it seems ridiculous to suppose that they could have traveled many times that distance and got all the way to Central America !

“What creation myths do you prefer people to pander to?”

Oh, the irony of this question appearing on a site dedicated to dubunking nonsensical myths of all shapes and sizes.

And also the PC gibberish in aprilista’s comments is very amusing too. Maybe it’s time for counterknowledge to mention the Alan Sokal hoax, just in case some who read this blog are unfamiliar with it.

“PC gibberish”

As I recall, I was gently implying that, without further evidence, it’s rash to make assumptions about who was involved in producing culture in an ancient civilisation.

… Historical and archaeological inquiry is best undertaken with an open mind. Preconceptions and excess cultural baggage may hamper one’s reading of the evidence on the ground.

And, of course, there’s a difference between close-minded people and those who bring experience to bear.

So, in summary, the author’s beliefs are just as speculative as Hancock’s.

“blah blah blah… lively imaginations” – now that’s science in action folks!!!

Isn’t a more likely explanation that the Olmecs had encountered some African people or, possibly, the Olmecs were African?

What’s a “cult archaeologist” anyhow????

Obviously Hatcher isn’t a professional archaeologist but an experienced traveller who has visited loads of sites. But hey, if having your own unorthodox ideas damns you as cultist, then we may as well go back to the dark ages.

Now I geddit – the delicious double meaning in counterknowledge does actually refer to your own mission to stop or “counter” rival forms of information or “knowledge”. Correct me if I;m wrong.

Aprilista,

As I recall, I was gently implying that, without further evidence, it’s rash to make assumptions about who was involved in producing culture in an ancient civilisation.

Well, no, that’s not all you were doing. For one thing, you accused the author of the original post of racism and sexism for referring to the creators of these artefacts as “craftsmen” and not “artists” – and you did so despite the fact that the word “craftsmen” can mean “artisan” or “artist”, and, its suffix notwithstanding, can be gender neutral. In other words, you were detecting these prejudices in “homeopathic concentrations” – i.e. where they don’t exist.

Judean Peoples Front,

So, in summary, the author’s beliefs are just as speculative as Hancock’s.

Well that might indeed be a summary. Quite what on Earth it’s a summary of, however, remains something of a mystery.

Ed. I chided the OP for condescension and rehearsing ahistorical thinking.

It’s important to remember that what you think and what others think may often differ.

It’s important to remember that what you think and what others think may often differ.

Exquisite.

It’s off topic, but I’m wondering how the 9/11 “truthers” are going to deal with this.

A better explanation for some Olmec statues looking Chinese is that Olmecs and other Native Americans were of Asian ancestry. Some Indians look very Chinese. As to the “Negroid” features of the Olmec heads (the football player heads) one explanation is that the rulers were highly inbred and this led to deformities.

Saw the word “negroid,” clicked expecting evidence of dread C’thuhu’s awakening.

Left disappointing, screaming in tongues.

Glad to see that white people still firmly believe in white supremacy. It will inevitably be their downfall. smh

Guys, Seriously, put your cocks away and the rulers down.
It stings when someone one-ups your opinions that you’ve worked so hard to mould but you’re never gonna know that you’re 100% correct in your idea of the truth so keep the floor open for alternative discussion points without the need to re-educate.

Childress puts forward a selection of truths and facts. Some may argue that the order in which he does this is created to bring the audience to a shared conclusion, whether factual or nay, but he asks us “How is this possible?”, rather than stating it to be undeniable. Creating a discussion point and thats what we’re doing is it not?……Or were you in fact roaming around a few millenia ago with the Meso-Americans to be so sure of yourselves.

Plus he has an extremely silly voice for a narrator that keeps me listening.
Sounds like someone from South park.

Two things, there is no evidence that there was any trans-Atlantic voyages 2500 years ago, the time period that the Olmecs live. Then, all the human remains that were associated with the Olmecs and the ones that built the heads, had similar DNA to the people who live there today. Also, they is greater variation between them and people from West Africa than from the people who Populate Eastern Siberia.

You might want to listen to these cult-archaeologists than philanthropist like Graham Hancock. Also, I do find it racist to say that an indiginous culture could not have built monuments when in fact, they could have. That is exactly what Graham Hancock is saying.

Sorry, I meant real Archaeology, not cult-archaeology.

Indians don’t come out of a cookie-cutter. Both heads look like people I know; members of the same tribe. Have any of you been to a reservation?

Why do some of you people hate your African ancestry so much? If you cannot disprove the evidence given, accept it. The hate many of you have for your own ancestry will not change the facts.

It is really pathetic that some people in this world despite access to the information technology thats avalible to them continue to express stupid racist denials about the acomplishments of ancient african peoples and what they created in this world. I just laff at their ongoing willingness to be ignorant. The olmecs were black africans and it’s nothing you or anybody else can do anything about it.

Olmecs were an American Indian people. Afrocentrics are in dire need to make up for their lack of progress and/or ignorance as to who their direct ancestors were. Also missing is a genuine connection with any African peoples.

To Multiplesourses and Ken Williams Sr. There is no evidence of a Tranatlantic crossing between Africa and Central America at any time in history before 1500 AD. There is no evidence of there being Africans in Central American at anytime before 1500 AD. The only evidence that you have that the heads were built by Africans is in the way they look, and that can also be explained without having to use an outside source. “Van Sertima’s (the man who came up with the hypothesis) asserts that they are clearly African in appearance, and indeed they do possess full lips and broad noses. Van Sertima, however, ignores the fact that many of the Olmec heads also have flat faces like American Indians, not prognathic profiles (jutting-out lower faces) like Africans. He also chooses not to see what appear to be epacatnthic folds on the eyelids of the statues-these are typical of Old World Asians and American Indians.” -Ken Feder; Frauds, Myths, and Mysteries.

Lastly, about being racist? Is it not racist to take away the accomplishments of one culture and give it to another? Saying that the Olmecs did not build those heads is like saying the Egyptians did not build the pyramids.

To RolandofGilead and other skeptics on this subject of the Olmecs: First, I completely agree that taking and ignoring the accomplishments of native peoples anywhere in this world is a crime against humanity . The entire western world and 99 percent of it’s academic institutions to this day still maintains a mindset of eurocentric superiority which reinforces it’s belief systems through every media source avaliable and the school institutions on every level. Second, there are and have been scores of historians thoughout generations who support the research on ancient africans crossing the world’s oceans and establishing settlements of different kinds in many lands.Third,
there are hundreds of ancient artifacts that are linked to Africa that have been discoverd in Mexico and are on display in their many museums. Fourth, now if you and others don’t want to do the proper research and read more , that’s your intellectual problem. Fifth, Dr. Ivan Van Sertima and all of his peers on this unique and fascinating subject will all be vindicated.

“First, I completely agree that taking and ignoring the accomplishments of native peoples anywhere in this world is a crime against humanity . The entire western world and 99 percent of it’s academic institutions to this day still maintains a mindset of eurocentric superiority which reinforces it’s belief systems through every media source avaliable and the school institutions on every level.”

Uhm, No. Despite the Eurocentric ideals that I may espouse, (WTF does that even mean???) that still doesn’t change the fact there is no evidence what-so-ever that African’s built the Heads, nor do the heads even look African. You see, there is a thing called fact, which does not care what country I’m from.

“Second, there are and have been scores of historians thoughout generations who support the research on ancient africans crossing the world’s oceans and establishing settlements of different kinds in many lands.”

Like who? Graham Hancock? Van Danikan? Robert Schlock? None of these men are historians or archaeologist. They have constantly ignored all evidence that calls their pet hypothesis into doubt, and continiously push irrelevant points that have been debunked. Not to mention that Graham Hancock believes the world is coming to an end on Dec, 12 2012. They are no different from the 9/11 truthers or creationists.

Also, I would like to add that just because somebody can build a raft and sail it across the Atlantic, does not mean it was being done 3000 years ago. I’ve got news for ya, the confederates during the civil war had the materials and technology to make liquid fueled rockets. However, there is no evidence that they did. That is how we know they didn’t. Where is your evidence of Africans or Asians crossing 3000 years ago?

“Third, there are hundreds of ancient artifacts that are linked to Africa that have been discoverd in Mexico and are on display in their many museums.”

Really? Can I see a link to these artifacts, maybe some context as to where and when these artifacts are found? Yes, it might be interesting to find a Roman coin in Maine, but it doesn’t mean that the Romans were there when the coin was found in the context of an 18th century farmstead. There are plenty of artifacts that come from around the world found in the Americas. The only problem, is that they are found well within the context of the Contact Period. There is a reason that Archaeologists note stratigraphy of a site. That is how they date the site.

“Fourth, now if you and others don’t want to do the proper research and read more , that’s your intellectual problem.”

I don’t have a problem. I listen to people who have meticulously mapped, surveyed, and detailed the site, not someone who looks at a picture and then decides what it looks like.

“Fifth, Dr. Ivan Van Sertima and all of his peers on this unique and fascinating subject will all be vindicated.”

For some reason, I highly doubt that. I quoted an actual archaeologist. What do you have.

Dear Mr. RolandofGilead,

An Ancient African Proverb: Lies can run for years, but the truth can catch them in a day.

Keep living until you find out !!!!!

Dear Ken Williams Sr.

Archaeology deals with facts. If you want truth, I’m sure you can find a philosophy class somewhere.

I’m still waiting for you to produce the evidence for you to actually back up your claim. A quotation about truth is not evidence, and it proves to me that you really don’t know what you are talking about.

There is one cure for the absurd idea that the Olmecs were “Africans”. Just look at some pictures of contemporary Native Indian inhabitants of the region. Guess what. You find many that look like the”Negroid” heads and others that look like the “Mongoloid” and others that look like the “Semitic” heads. As been said before the evidence for such contact is minimal to zero. Further it apears that Olmec civilization emeerged from pre-existing village cultures. Oh and when Van Sertima originally suggested his idea Olmec civilization was thought to emerge c. 800 B.C.E., and the source an Nubian dominated Egypt, the date is now pushing 1500 B.C.E. and earlier which throws a wrench in that idea.

As for keeping you mind open for new ideas. Well if you ignore vast amounts of data the way Childress does your hardly having a open mind. Oh and please explain why anyone should take this idea the slightest bit seriously when the only “evidence” in support of it is sculptures of people who look like natives who live in the region today?

Finally, someone else who thinks to look at the actual people involved. Thank you, Pacal.

Two things, there is no evidence that there was any trans-Atlantic voyages 2500 years ago, the time period that the Olmecs live. Then, all the human remains that were associated with the Olmecs and the ones that built the heads, had similar DNA to the people who live there today. Also, they is greater variation between them and people from West Africa than from the people who Populate Eastern Siberia.
You might want to listen to these cult-archaeologists than philanthropist like Graham Hancock. Also, I do find it racist to say that an indiginous culture could not have built monuments when in fact, they could have. That is exactly what Graham Hancock is saying.

The best explanation for the so-called “negroid” traits in Olmec statue and in some Olmec crania is that there were two waves of humans migrating from Asia. The earliest wave of humans from Asia resembled modern Melaneseans and Africans the latter wave resembled so-called Mongoloids. Both types lived in Meso-America at least until the age of the Spanish conquest.

‘Plenty of other Olmec statues look as if they depict people from other parts of the world because these Native American craftsmen had lively imaginations. It really is as simple as that.’
Then i stopped reading…

Why are these phenomena easier to argue about than actually research? If I were to buy a car; I could stay at home, looking at photos online, reading anecdotes about the car, and so on…
or- I can actually LOOK at the car, drive it, and so on.
The persons involved in it’s design and production are irrelevant.

IMPORTANT: Mr. Damian Thompson has not ‘driven this car’, but has only collated an opinion borne of his research, which he put forward as fact (and with an inherent meanness that is very off-putting, might I add)…if Mr. Thomson has actually visited the Land of the Olmecs, done a visual survey of the current inhabitants of the area, and interiewed the area’s primary archaeological personnel- I formally apologize, and heartily so.
Mr. Hancock has test-driven the car.
He’s been to Cenral America numerous times, seen almost all of the heads and other important artefacts-touched them!- and spoken wth numerous local CREDENTIALed EXPERTS.
It is painfully obvious that Damien hasn’t read the material he condemns.
Mr. Thomson wastes everyone’s time arguing something that can be conclusively proven with a minimum of effort.
Of course, the local artisans had the imagination, talent, and technology to craft these heads.
I personally believe there was an African influence on the locals, but that this influence was via ET intervention. THIS IS MY OPINION, as I have yet to ‘drive’ that car. (and probably never will)
Damien-intelligent folks (such as yourself…i AM a fan!) should never state their opinion (or even other people’s opinions) as fact. To do so is immature, irresposible, and damaging to the collective forward momentum of the human race.
PS-Aprilista, my opinion is that you have such a sexy brain!
peace to all-
RA Boesenberg

Graham Hancock is great, I really like him. He is not some lunatic with weird ideas based on nothing. I dont like the comparison with Danniken, who has ideas based on nearly nothing, or Zitchin, but not hancock. And his ideas and theories should be looked into because they have solid bones to it, they could also help us to understand certain aspect of the amazing mysteries of Human Civilisation. And a lot of academics are starting to realize that now. And millions of people around the world too.
This is how our understandings evolved, we always reviewed our own ideas in the past, even if it is painfull, to find new truth and make new discoveries. Humans make mistake, and the fact that we might have misunderstood and misinterpreted some of the legacy of the Ancient World is not something that should be ruled out, but considered. Too much evidences to be ignored. Look back in History and it really wouldn’t be the first time that we got it wrong, really wrong, until someone said “hang on a minute, what about……” Examples are way too many to be worth named here. Come on, we were convinced that the planet was flat! It would be arrogant to think that we haven’t made such mistake again, or that we won’t.
I think archeologists and egyptologists don’t like that fact that non-professionals could have seen something they missed for years, and there is a pride issue here. If they all worked together we would make huge progress in these fields.
Hancock might be wrong, and he doesn’t claim to provide the absolute thruth, but instead he suggests a new approach, a different point of view. Instead of stupid attacks and pitiful attempts to ridicule him, there should be a real debate.
And seriously, if you have a minimum of common sense, an open mind and a certain obvious logic, you will see that he has a point. A Big one, too big to be dismissed as fantasy.
Anyway, blind people can stay blind, they dont read and then they talk……silly. Sad.
Hancock is onto something, and wether you like it or not, that something is out there.
Among many things, I really wonder about that Yonagumi structure, what about that? Fantasy? LOL

RA Boesenberg and Sanji’s posts are hilarious. Such cultivated and worked up ignorance. Yes Hancock talked to the experts and proceeded to ignore practically all that they said to him. His books are filled with fantasy and deep ignorance. The section on Tiwanku is esspecially funny.

Hancock goes on for pages about Tiwanku being over 10 thousand years old while taking barely any notice of th fact that practically everyone who as worked on the site dates it to c. 300-1000 C.E. (A.D.).

Olmec sites have benn excavated and NO remains indicating an African presence ot ET have been found. There are of course plenty of remains of pre Olmec village cultures indicating and showing the development of Olmec civilization with no indication of Old World influence.

Critical literature on Hancock is abundant and indicates that he is a distorter and fantastist.

Hancock as simply driven his car over a cliff, probably because he as self-blinded himself. He as also openly admited that he is a one sided researcher out to defend his “client”.

Well i have talked to Mesoamerican Archaeologists and specialists and with no exceptions they regard Hancock as a crank.

So Boesenberg you think the Olmec were influenced by ET? That of course only shows me that you are deeply ignorant about Olmec archaeology.

As for Sanji, well what you said about Yonagumi is amusing. Haen’t done much research on it, it seems. Except of course possibly true believer material.

Thanks for the laughs guys.

Oh and please explain to me why the statues look like modern Indians who live in the area if they are suppossed to be of Africans?

Well reading my comment again, I do sound a bit like a simple – minded hippy. Right, let me precise a few things, I am not a full-on Hancock fan. I do not know a huge amount about him, but I saw “Quest for the Lost Civilisation”, and I read “Supernatural”, an absolutely amazing book, unrelated to his usual topics it seems. I really didn’t see what in there makes him a worthless ignorant. History, as we know it, is probably quite distorted and incomplete already.
After this I decided to look further into his work and theories. I have been a bit surprised by the range of his ideas and even found that sometimes he goes quite far actually. He made me think about a trigger-happy cowboy shooting in all directions in the hope of hiting a target.

Also, the next thing I did, immediately, was to researched his critics. This is how I came on this page.
Quite frankly, from what I ve read so far, most critics do indeed show flaws in his ideas, and he is probably wrong on some of them, no doubt about that. But what I also see is people picking on details – but flaws -, in a speech fuelled with bad faith, arrogance and bitterness. Then they dismiss the entire caracter, the theory talked about, as well as his other ideas and then brand him an amateur, lunatic, pseudo archeologosist and so on. And this is where I think it’s wrong, even with flaws, his ideas are still quite interesting, still valid enough to be worth further serious studies, and especially the general frame of mind behind it, something that his opponents and established theories do not take in count, at all. His ideas about Egypt and the Orion Correlation Theory is so obvious that I don’t understand why they are not taken in count by people that still haven’t manage to solve the mystery themselve.
He is obviously very clever and down to earth, his appraoch and the way he thinks is what I like; It deserves attention and debate.

And usually, lets face it, the established ideas he is fightning against most definitely leave room for plenty of inconsistencies, mysteries and MANY legitimate questions to be raised, don’t you think?
Even if he might be wrong, he has a certain angle on these subjects that science ignores, and his view would certainly help. I think we need people like him to shake things up a bit, and progress. Because this is how we alwasy did.

Regarding that Yonagumi structure, I don’t know what you mean by “True believer material”. What I believe is that we have here an underwater structure that has the same base lenght of the Great Pyramid (not completely sure about that), that is aligned North / South, and seems man-made. And last time it was above water was 8 to 12000 years ago, a time where no one on earth could have had the technology or knowledge to do it. I find this fact, on its own, taken apart from any context or theory, is quite amazing, isn’t it?. It is not garanteed that it is man made, but in my opinion this is just a matter of time. Japan’s top marine geologist and many other seems to think that this possibilty is high enough to bet their own career on it. I have seen many pics of it, do you really think that nature did that?? Not impossible, but mathematically, scientifically and logicaly, it seems quite unlikely. The odds speak volume.

Anyway, about this page’s subject, I had no specific opinion about it so far, apart that this is just another weird subject to study. So Hancock promotes garbage about it? Ah cool, why then? Your answer is “because these Native American craftsmen had lively imaginations. It really is as simple as that”.

Heh??? Jesus, what if they didn’t have “a lively imagination”?? It is possible but that is not a study, this is just an assumption. Great work, thanks Einstein.
I had a look on this site, and I found a whole topic about 9/11, and how people that think that US government might have been involved are idiots.
If this is an American website, man THAT is hilarious.

@RA Boesenberg

Have you read “Fingerprints of the Gods?” I have. Not once did Hancock consult any archaeologist, DNA specialist, or historian who would know anything on the matter. Sorry, Hancock did not test drive car either.

Sanji you say:

His ideas about Egypt and the Orion Correlation Theory is so obvious that I don’t understand why they are not taken in count by people that still haven’t manage to solve the mystery themselve.

I smile a big smile and laugh out loud. Just the barest amount of research will indicate that the orion correlation like the 10500 BCE correlation is dubious. (It is from Edgar Cayce for example) Of course the pyramids around Giza do NOT form the constellation orion unless you do a major distortion. Further there were two pharoahs who lived between the builders of the three great pyramids who did NOT build at Giza. Of course did not not remember that Hancock propsed that the pyramids were built to commemorate a date c. 10500 B.C.E. A completly absurd idea. THe number of Egyptologists who give any credence to this idea can be numbered at close to 0. Oh and as for the three pyramids of Giza looking like Oions belt. Well only if Orion’s belt was backwards.

As for

Regarding that Yonagumi structure, I don’t know what you mean by “True believer material”. What I believe is that we have here an underwater structure that has the same base lenght of the Great Pyramid (not completely sure about that), that is aligned North / South, and seems man-made. And last time it was above water was 8 to 12000 years ago, a time where no one on earth could have had the technology or knowledge to do it. I find this fact, on its own, taken apart from any context or theory, is quite amazing, isn’t it?. It is not garanteed that it is man made, but in my opinion this is just a matter of time. Japan’s top marine geologist and many other seems to think that this possibilty is high enough to bet their own career on it. I have seen many pics of it, do you really think that nature did that?? Not impossible, but mathematically, scientifically and logicaly, it seems quite unlikely. The odds speak volume.

Yep you have swallowed truebeliever material by the cartload. I felt like rolling around the floor laughing when I read the above. The overwhelming majority of Geologists who have examined Yonagumi rate it as natural. The fact that you haven’t come across this only indicates your lack of research. So sorry the “site” is natural geology. Yep I’ve seen the pics and it looks natural to me. The fact that you have said the above only tells me you have done research in true believer places.

As for this comment

But what I also see is people picking on details – but flaws -, in a speech fuelled with bad faith, arrogance and bitterness. Then they dismiss the entire caracter, the theory talked about, as well as his other ideas and then brand him an amateur, lunatic, pseudo archeologosist and so on. And this is where I think it’s wrong, even with flaws, his ideas are still quite interesting, still valid enough to be worth further serious studies, and especially the general frame of mind behind it, something that his opponents and established theories do not take in count, at all.

Aww we call a crank a crank and a distorter a distorter. We’re so bad. Sorry but Hancock is a distorter his treatment of both the Maya and Tiwanaku are replente with examples of incredible distortion. His discusion of the Mayan calander is a monument to bad scholarship. The rest of his works are incredible examples of fraud and fakery. The theory is nonsense that does not in the least deserve to be taken seriously. Hancock”s “evidence” non existant. We are talking about a man who took the face on Mars seriously here. Of course no account as per usual is taken of Hancocks view of professional archaeologists as conspirators covering up the truth or his calculated contempt for them.

Thank you again for giving an excellent example of how a true believer forms and of course showing once again deep ignorance.

Look man, I didn’t post here to start a debate about every aspects of Hancock’s work and theory, like I can see everywhere else, or to be branded an ignorant by a smug head who dont know anything about me, what I know or what I do for a living. I came here to see critics about him and once again these critics are rubbish or not enough to make me think hancock is worthless. You can find answers about what you just said on the Giza pyramids OCT and Yonagumi yourself so I wont bother trying to defend these point cos others are doing that already.
“These poeple had a lively imagination, it really is as simple as that”
Bless you.
You people play your role perfectly. Pigeons don’t even know they are pigeons, so I will just let you keep enjoying the smell of your own farts on this little online circus, and keep walking pass the blind and fools.

Sanji, you said:

Look man, I didn’t post here to start a debate about every aspects of Hancock’s work and theory, like I can see everywhere else, or to be branded an ignorant by a smug head who dont know anything about me, what I know or what I do for a living. I came here to see critics about him and once again these critics are rubbish or not enough to make me think hancock is worthless. You can find answers about what you just said on the Giza pyramids OCT and Yonagumi yourself so I wont bother trying to defend these point cos others are doing that already.
“These poeple had a lively imagination, it really is as simple as that”
Bless you.
You people play your role perfectly. Pigeons don’t even know they are pigeons, so I will just let you keep enjoying the smell of your own farts on this little online circus, and keep walking pass the blind and fools.

Oh well You should really not say anything as once again you reveal your deep ignorance and utter unwillingless to learn. Read some basic texts on Egyptology and Archaeology first, which you have so plainly failed to do.

As for being a smug head thats a little rich coming from someone who says:

You people play your role perfectly. Pigeons don’t even know they are pigeons, so I will just let you keep enjoying the smell of your own farts on this little online circus, and keep walking pass the blind and fools.

I’m not going to take seriously being called a pigeon, which
is your way of saying I’ve been sucked into believing stuff that is not true, from someone who quite clearly does not have much knowledge of Archaeology. I suggest that if anyone is the pigeon it is you who has been sucked into swallowing Hancock’s and others dubious crap. If you want to swallow the lies and distortions of people like Hancock please do so. please continue to ignore the vast mountain of evidence that refutes their fantasies.

As for this comment:

You can find answers about what you just said on the Giza pyramids OCT and Yonagumi yourself so I wont bother trying to defend these point cos others are doing that already.

Yep true believers and other fatasists are continuing to distort and lie about those things. THe fact is that the overwhelming majority of geologists reject the idea that Yonagumi is artificial. The vast majority of Egyptologists reject the OCT and the Great Pyramids. The speculations, fantasies and hand waving of the true believers are of little interest to the real experts. I can only suggest that you look at this extensive and massive literature demolishing this crap.

P{lease continue to fantasize yourself has possessed by true knowledge that us, poor deluded “pigeons” who rely on real evidence are excluded from. The evidence is quite overwhelming that Hancock deliberately distorts and is a shoddy scholar. As mentioned before his stuff about the dates of Tiwanaku and the Mayan Calander are quite enough to consign him to the garbage heap.

Of course the critics of Hancock are “rubbish” even though they have found error after error, nonsense after nonsense in Hancock all of which is easily found on the web. AS for being labeled as ignorant by a smug head? Well there is no reason for anyone to label you as ignorant your own comments do that quite well enough. As for not knowing you. Well based on your comments you are indeed phenomenally ignorant of archeaology and much else.

THank you for once again indicating that so many people attracted to alternative nonsense feel that they have special knowledge that the rest of us “pigeons” don’t have. As for farts please continue to enjoy Hancock’s abundant number 2s.

Hey, Sanji, here are two authors to start with if you want to know about real archaeology: Brian Fagan and Ken Feder.

I think the only garbage we can talk about is this stupid article. Whoever wrote it, he only makes statements and talks shit about Graham Hancock because he does not agree with him. He should realise Mr Hancock theories are being serioulsy taken into account by those who dare see things, not in the way we are said at universities by the statuos quo, but what the evidence itsel suggests. He says the olmecs were “imaginative”.
That ’s pathetic. I invite you to debate with ideas and not speak stupidities just because you are envious of Mr. Hancock contributions to unveil the humankind’s past.

Pacal and Sanji are nothing else but stupid apprentices who spit on Hancock’s work just because they are said to do so. A couple of arrogant misers whose only purpose is to convince people that the orthodox ancient history is the owner of complete trutth. How much are you paid? Perhaps you both defend is a crappy job at a faculty full of old biased arecheologists, so bitter that they can not accept the inconsistencies of their “discipline” (I do not call it science, since arqueology is not a science, physics is science, not this shit, chiefly when you see they are afraid of a multidisciplinaty aproach when studying the misteries of the past). You both guys, should be aware that we do not need your fucking point of view to get to grips with questions and conclusions about the ancient past of mankind. Why do not you come back to the shithole you came from?

Think about this, Hancock is more famous tham you could ever dream, because he dared say what you ingnore. History will say who was right, either hancock or a couple of anonym archeology aficionados of this shitty website.

Incognitus if you have any ability to read you should realize that Sanji thinks Hancock is great. I suppose you mean Roland of Gilead. Like Sanji though you display deep transcedent ignorance. Let us look at your bowel movements.

He should realise Mr Hancock theories are being serioulsy taken into account by those who dare see things, not in the way we are said at universities by the statuos quo, but what the evidence itsel suggests.

The fact that Hancock as a few deluded followers who know next to nothing about Archaeology impresses me not at all. As for what the evidence suggests. Mr. Hancock of course as is typical for him ignores the evidence and what it says. The evidence overwhelmingly says that Twanaku is less than 2000 years old, but Hancock ignores it. The evidence does not support Hancock’s prehistoric supercivilization, but in fact refrutes and of course he ignores it.

Pacal and Sanji are nothing else but stupid apprentices who spit on Hancock’s work just because they are said to do so. A couple of arrogant misers whose only purpose is to convince people that the orthodox ancient history is the owner of complete trutth. How much are you paid? Perhaps you both defend is a crappy job at a faculty full of old biased arecheologists, so bitter that they can not accept the inconsistencies of their “discipline” (I do not call it science, since arqueology is not a science, physics is science, not this shit, chiefly when you see they are afraid of a multidisciplinaty aproach when studying the misteries of the past). You both guys, should be aware that we do not need your fucking point of view to get to grips with questions and conclusions about the ancient past of mankind. Why do not you come back to the shithole you came from?

Lets see a complete novice like Hancock, with little real knowledge tries to overthrow the work of thousands of scholars with nothing more than a fantasy of wish fulfillmen t and the defenders of so-called Orthodoxy are arrogant!? Irony of ironies.

Like all good true believers you fantasize that any opponents of your revealed truth are motivated by bias and of course are paid. Well I’m not being paid at all for this, sadly! Also the usual conspiracy psychosis / delusion.

So Archaeology is not a science. Thank you for showing a most deep ignorance. Please read an introductory text to Archaeology. Of course you then label it “shit”. Please explain to me in detail how to do do a dig in the desert versus underwater. How to perform a carbon 14 test. Please explain Paleoethnobiology. How to do a shell midden Analysis? All of which are involved modern Archaeology.

As for being afraid of a multidisplinary approach. Well that is exactly what modern Archaeology involves routinely. Your statement about fear only provides abundant evidence that you are indeed phenomnally ignorant of Archaeology.

Like all true believers when your cherished delusions are attacked you react by screams of hysteria. Sorry but I didn’t come out of a shithole and so won’t ever be going there.

As for thinking about Hancock’s fame. Why should I? I’m glad he as made himself rich off the deludded and guilible, because that is the only way the guilible and credulous will learn. As for daring to say what I ignore. Hancock is merely saying pseudoscientific crap that others have said before, it is nothing new but the same old snake oil. The verdict is already in and was in long before Hancock and it says he is full of it.

OK; Pacal, you want to play hard? Lest do it.
You, Mr. Almighty encarnation of archeology, explain to me a few things and make me wise:

1) Baalbek in Lebanon: How did the ancients cut and moved blocks of 1500 tones? What is the technical method to to this? Why are our modern cranes not able to move them and the ancientswere?

2) How do you date stone using C14?

3) Why the similarities between cultures like the mayans and egiptians, why did both cultures were avid stargazers and built pyramids? Are all of these similarities “just coincidence”?

4) Why does the sphinx have evidence of erosion caused by massive water flow on it? When does the climate record say Egipt had a rainy weather? Robert Schoch put his reputation at stake saying this is the case with the sphinx…was he wrong?

4) Finally, how are we suppose to trust a horde of biased individuals when they can not even offer an open explanation to these dilemas?

5) Give the link to the archeological papers that show your points. If not, I will suposse you are a windbag and nothing more!!!!

Finally, Richard Feymann was very critic of scientific methods in social sciences (which includes archeology, as far as I understand), see and grow intellectually:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IaO69CF5mbY

From the point of view of a phycisist, archeology is just a bunch of innacurate methods whose uncertainty grows the more we go back in time. It is not a natural science. When we are talking about pre-history events, I think archeology is more flawed than ever.

SAnji, sorry for what I said about you, I think I put you side by side with that discusting Pacal, which is already a painful mistake!!!
Really sorry!!!

Incognitus you can read my reply to your nonsense at.
http://makinapacalatxilbalba.blogspot.com/2010/07/hancock-woo-graham-hancock-following-is.html

Hey Pacal,:I have read all your astonishing compilation of books and ad-hominems. It is funny to believe you are very wise because you have wasted your life loving books instead of women, but that is your problem, not mine. You should not reveal your secrets in your website. However, in my view you are a biased ignorant.

1) You supported my point that C!4 method can not date stone. From that point of view, it means dating of organic material is highly dependent on the interpretation of the archeologist.

You quoted:
“The stones were transported over a path only 600 meters length and about 15 meters *downhill*. The quarry is 1160 meters high, and the temple 145 meters. So it was easy to keep the stones on an even level to their final resting place and it was unnecessary to lift them about 7 meters as some authors claim. As you might know, Rome is the city with the most obelisks outside of Egypt. They stole the things by the dozen and took them home. The heaviest known obelisk weighs 510 tons, and it was transported some 1000’s of *kilometers*. This transport was documented by the roman author Marcellinus Comes. The Romans even left detailed paintings and reliefs about the ways to move such things : as on the bottom of the Theodosius-obelisk in Istanbul. They used “Roman-patented” winches, in German called “Göpelwinden” which work with long lever ways. To move a 900 ton stone, they needed only 700 men. The transport was slow, about 30 meters a day, because they had to dismantle and rebuild the winches every few meters, to pull the obelisk with maximum torque. But in Baalbek, where they moved several blocks, maybe they built an alley of winches, where they passed the block from winch to winch.”

My answer to that is SHOW IT. Has this experiment been done with such weights there? Of course not. I see many 2000 tones blocks moved and that fit perfectly in a complex distribution. I know for sure the most powerful cranes can not lift weight heavier than 300 tones. If you were an Engineer, you would understand it is just not a matter of leting them go down the hill, as your very purposely selected quotation says. I will not believe your quotation because it contradicts common sense, my common sense tells me it is not possible to move such kind of blocks

2) You have answered as expected. C14 can not date stones. Why do archeologists dare say with complete certainty the date in wich any monument was built? It is left to the analist criterium, and that is not valid in such matters. There is a degree of uncertainty that is ihnerent to this method and that can not be helped, as simple as that. In the most ancient monuments, the interpretation deduced by archeologists may be flawed or biased to let the evidence fit in the stream of knowledge they accept. What guarantees that the monument and the age of the carbon dated sample are the same? As far as I see it, a monument could be far older than the carbon dated samples and this fact may not be detected by the archeological survey. I find a problem with this, sorry.

You seem to assume you should trust the archeologists and that we should believe they are never biased or whatsoever. If you were a natural scientist you would understand that is not the case. Doesn’t matter. The IPCC is a clear example of how preconceptions can even make you doubt about a “serious research”. If climate scientists are prone to this thing, I believe archeologists as well. So your claim of complete trust to the methods of these people doesn’t work for me.

3) You seem completely unaware of the many similarities between these ancient cultures. Tell me something…have you read Hancock’s work? I bet you have not. He points out the parallels among these cultures with good clarity. He may not be right in everything he claims, but the evidence of something wrong with the accepted archeology explanation is vast, in my view we have a case here. In Physics, if you have an anomaly in a theory that does not fit it makes your theory crumble. Why is not this the case in archeology? You say they are “scientists”.
You tell me “that human civilizations have similarities because they are human civilizations”, a poor explanation for someone who boast his intelligence for reading dusty second-hand books in a library. If you were archeologist unless… what it shows is that you are not aware of such similarities, therefore you should undertake your own investigation in the matter.

4) Do you contradict Robert Schoch? His evidence comes from geology, a natural science, certainly more robust and accurate that this “science” called archeology. So I have to believe you instead of DR. Schoch, which is a leading scholar in his field? You must be kidding!!! Of course his arguments are disputed by ignorants in geological aspects, which find it easy to give support to their preconceived ideas on the Sphinx.

5) I am not paying you, that is true. I would pay quality job, not your second-hand research. If you say you are right, you have to show it. If you do not want to be asked, you do not get into this forum.
I will not recommend you so many books, as I would not like to end up like you. Please take a look a the archeological inconsistencies that DR. Cremo points out in the following book:
http://www.amazon.com/Forbidden-Archeology-Hidden-History-Human/dp/0892132949

He has a PhD and he does not find what I have told you coming from “an ignorant”. I do not care what you may think, what you think is your problem. But you should be aware that people have the right to question even the academia when searching for answers. People like you can only see and believe what they have been said by a system who wants you to believe what is useful to them. You should make an effort for not sticking your head in the sand and try to open your mind at these inconsistencies, and start to question. But it may be late for you, as far as I see.

You are right, I may not take time to read your books. I live in paradise, not in that shitty land called Canada, full of snow and with freezing temperatures most of the year. Specimens like you are rare here, since we are not obliged to spend our lifes secluded at home or in libraries for not having something interesting to do.

Pakal, I would like to make public how you try to misinform us. You quote about the Theodosius Obelisk, which weighs 400 tones.
See the following link:

http://www.flickr.com/photos/brswanson/2809124885/

THis obeliks was cut into three or two pieces to make possible its transportation. It was originaly 30m tall when in Egipt, but for some technical problem it is now 19m tall. Very interesting. You dare put this obeliks of 400 tones which had to be cut to be moved as comparable to the baalbek blocks. Do you really think people are stupid?

This is another example of people whose knowledge is based how spending their lives reading academic books (real aficionados) but not based on commoon sense.

Sorry, the more you read your arguments, the more I am convinced you do not know what you are talking about.

Icognitus Just as I expected a flood of ad-hominoms that are meaningless and even more powerful indications that you are a true believer and deeply ignorant. Thank you for your concern about my personal life and why are you dragging that in all?

Regarding Carbon 14 dating. Not the slightest bit interested in learning how it works it seems. Again the question of does carbon 14 date rocks is a red herring and is meaningless. No one expects it to date rocks at all. Then again if it did the dates would be in millions of years n’est pas?

But then your further comments indicate that you have absolutely no willingness to find out how carbon 14 is done. As for errors of course they happen and that is why Carbon 14 has all sorts of protocals etc., to minimizes errors. Of course error happen but why should that be a surprise which is why more than one date should be done.

As for your “common sense” regarding Baalbek. If the Romans could move 3 blocks weighing over 100 tons each from Egypt to Constaninople (Istambul) than they could move 1000 tons 1000 yards or less. I note you don’t deal with the evidence found in digs at Baalbek that date the monument to Roman times. As for a crane well I would think we could move a thousand ton block if we wanted to do so. And in fact concrete oil drilling platforms weighing more are moved all the time. As for the crane. So what. The Romans and Egyptians had ropes, pulleys and enourmous work forces. Oh and by the way ancient methods of moving rocks are tested all the time and they work. The only difference between moving a big block and a small block is the labour, time involved the techniques were the same. “Common sense” dictates that this methods were the same only larger. Oh and if Archimedes could design a gaget to lift a ship out of the water the Romans could devise a technique to move 1000 tons 100 yards or less. If the Romans could build 100 miles of Road and 100 miles of aquduct, both more difficult than Baalbek, than they could build Baalbek. Oh and please show that the Romans could not have moved a thousand ton block less than 1000 yards.

As for similarities you just don’t get it. Similarities don’t prove contact they just are similarities. For smoeone who is convinced that Archaeology isn’t like Physics, you seem to want it to be so.

Do you honestly feel that the fact we are human would not lead to cultural similarities without contact? Also you forget the similarities are in many cases vague. After all Mayan and Egyptian pyramids are not very similar. Oh and did you know that pyramids in Peru pre-date Egyptian? The fact is their as been virtually no evidence of old world artifacts in pre-columbian america. Which would be the case if there was contact. Oh and i’ve read Hancock’s Fingerprints of the Gods and several others.

As for Robert Schoch. Obviously you haven’t read or read very badly the stuff I linked too. Do you forget that Geologists have disputed him. Well if it upsets your preconcieved views continue to ignore that fact.

You complain about my second hand research. Well it is obvious you have done no research yourself and thank you for indicating that you have little to no willingness to do reseach yourself.

As for Cremo. Read his book. It was a incredibly funny read. The guy is guilible. Yep he has a Phd and is a creationist and a Vedic scholar. He is another true believer like Hancock. Who now goes around saying the world may end in 2012.

It is you who has stuck his head in the sand and thank you for telling me that you probably won’t read the books I suggested. I guess you don’t want your “truth” questioned. As for thinking people are stupid, well you don’t think the Romans could move those blocks etc. I don’t think your stupid, but you are as this posting shows deeply ignorant and utterly unwilling to remedy that.

As for the personal comments and the insulting reference to my country all it proves is that you are acting 5 years old.

“Plenty of other Olmec statues look as if they depict people from other parts of the world because these Native American craftsmen had lively imaginations. It really is as simple as that.”
LooooooooooL
Man I haven’t laughed so much this week. Thank you, your arrogant ignorance has just made my day.
Keep writing.

I told myself I wouldn’t bother looking again at this crappy page where two individuals think they know about things just because they ve read books that everyone agreed to keep as non questionable truths and facts. Well I just had a look to see how things are going on this lost web page.
Sorry guys, Hancock and others outsmarted you, “experts” and everyone else, it is really as simple as that. They made fools of everyone else. Though they just observed things with a open mind free from academic protocols and took notes.
Experts are so old, bitter and up they re own arse that they will never reconsider or debate. Well its always been like this anyway. Nothing new really. Rinse. Repeat. Here you go, you just got 2000 years of History.
You people play the role of the bunch of cultivated guys who just will never get it. And its fine, this your role, this is what you are. You will always sit on it, blinded and fooled by your own knowledge, and the arrogance that comes out of it.
Yonagumi….off course most experts all agree to say it s natural. They all know (and this applies to other disciplines and about other subjects) what’s gonna happen to their career if they dont jump on the train. I m not interested in experts who think its natural..well exceptionnally impressive and rare to be more accurate. I m interested in experts who think it s man made. And so should you.
And this applies to Giza, south american sites and more.
Anyway, this situation where everyone tries to convince others that they are in the wrong is pointless.
Someone is right, and someone is wrong. And whether you like it or not, I think hancock is the closest to being right, that’s it. End of the story.
Dunno if you guys will watch it, I hope you will, but I found this quite interesting, two lectures from Hancock and Bauval

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DDDlHSjkz0g
and
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZA9JysD5ASk&feature=channel

The second one from Bauval is particulary interesting. If you do watch it, please let me know what you think. It is not too long and I would like to know what you both think of it. Yes they are a few little inconsistencies in what they say, even me noticed it, but it is still awesome. Though I expect you to say something about it being hilarious and showing deep ignorance and bla bla.

If you have something you would like to show me that supports your ideas, I will definitely watch it, so please dont hesitate to share.
Easy boyzz, speak soon.

Hey, Incognitus…

To answer your first question, I make $11.95 an hour working forty hours a week at Smithfield Luter pulling hogs. I wonder where my check from these so called cabal of archaeologist is at. I’m also 28, which I did not think made me old.

Now, here comes the beatdown. Hancock, (I have read Fingerprints of the Gods and actually am ashamed of the fact that I believed it at one point) provides no evidence that those heads are african in origin except that they look african. Well shiver me timbers, they must have been football players too because they’re wearing football helmets. Not really, but just to point out how stupid it is to make an assumption based on looks. This is what Hancock does, and he is wrong.

Your next question about some stones in Lebennon, the space shuttle weighs 2010 tons. Yet, somehow NASA has the ability to not only move this thing over to a launch pad over a mile from its dock, but also put it in orbit. And here’s the kicker, they do it without a crane. Hmmm, but your common sense would tell me this it not possible. You want to know how the stones were moved, probably by using cutting tools (these people had bronze and iron), and they probably moved them by putting them on wooden rollers. It’s that simple. …Or do you think they used some alien technology but did not leave any behind. Pacal answered this question for you, my suggestion is to stop insulting him.

Now on to C14 Radiometric Carbon Dating. Yes, C14 cannot date rock, but that is a strawman anyway. Archaeologist do not date rock and they do not use C14 all that much because they have to establish provenience. Dating the rock that a building is made out of only dates the rock and when it was created, it does not tell when the rock was first cut out of the ground and used as building material. The actual date of the rock is useless information to an archaeologist.

Also, there are ways to date rock, here are a few:
Uranium-Lead Dating
Uranium-Thorium Dating
Rubidium-Strontium Dating
[/pedantic]

Now, for the Maya/Egyptian connection. There was none. The pyramids in Egypt are true pyramids were as the pyramids in Mexico are not true pyramids. They are modified mounds with temples on top to symbolized a temple on a hill or horizon. The writing, artwork, and technology of the Mayans are very different from the Egyptians. Not to mention the time frame does not match up either. The Egyptian Kingdom went from Approx. 3500 BC to 750 BC when they became part of some other empire in history. The Maya City States went from 200BC to 1200 AD. There is a 550 year difference between the two. The only real similarity is the stargazing, but every human culture in history did that. It’s easy to find out things about the heavens when you don’t have TVs, Radios, and Videogames.

As for the Sphinx, Pacal answered this question perfectly. I will like to add that limestone and sandstone both are brittle rock. You can break it off in you hands and rub it into powder. It is very grainy and is easily broken. This has been demonstrated by archaeologists in both the Southwest and Egypt. I’ve actually held sandstone and I know from personal experiance how brittle it is. Brittle rock weathers easily.

BTW, Robert Shloch also said the movie Zeitgeist was acurate and true when it is neither. He has no credibility as a scientist as far as I’m concerned.

Now, I’m not going to do your research for you. You are making the claims, you back them up. Everything I have posted can be backed up just by looking on Wikipedia and Pacal has list of sources as well. I have neither the time nor the patiance and if you want me to prove you wrong, I’m not going to do it. You can look at the facts for what they are. If you don’t want to accept them for what they are, that’s your problem, not mine. Just be prepared when you wind up on the wrong side of history.

Hey Sanji. I do not care what you believe, and I am not here to convince you about Hancock? work. In fact, he may have made mistakes as well, as much as the archeologists are spreading lies about human’s past. It is up to do your own research. What I said Pakal is MY opinion, this is a debate forum, so read, say your opinion and support your arguments, that is all you have to do, no sensible person would claim complete credibility, as long as this person is humble enough to accept his own ignorance (except Pakal of course). I do not care whether you belive it or not, so do not worry and be happy!!!! I also believe all the crap you have just written.

I am beginning to suspect Rolando Gilead and Pakal are the same guy. In any case, Rolando, keep your bloody research for yourself, I am capable enough of doing mine. I have presented my arguments. Look at what you said:

“Your next question about some stones in Lebennon, the space shuttle weighs 2010 tons. Yet, somehow NASA has the ability to not only move this thing over to a launch pad over a mile from its dock, but also put it in orbit. And here’s the kicker, they do it without a crane. Hmmm, but your common sense would tell me this it not possible. You want to know how the stones were moved, probably by using cutting tools (these people had bronze and iron), and they probably moved them by putting them on wooden rollers. It’s that simple. …Or do you think they used some alien technology but did not leave any behind. Pacal answered this question for you, my suggestion is to stop insulting him.”

You are quite a real fool if you think this argument explains the Baalbek anomaly. Are you suggesting the ancients count on similar technology to lift those masive blocks? If that is the case, you are giving the kiss of death to your own argument.

If this is not what you meant, then you are giving the ancients credit for leifting a weight that can only be lifted by the modern NASA spaceship infrastructure, which undermines your arguments against the fact that the ancients used a diffierent technology. I challenge you to describe here how you move a 2000 tone block using ropes and timber logs, how you achive the uncanny precision in order to make these blocks fit perfectly.
I would like to read the nonsese you will come up with.

With your argument, you are just saying that such blocks can only be lifting with modern technology, so thans for supporting what I said.

Reality is so simple, but so difficult to understand for some people, that they tend to give poorly supported explanations for things that are completely obvious if you apply common sense.

Sanji, sorry mate, I have misinterpreted your words again, sorry for my rude tone. I amply agree with you.

I am beginning to suspect Rolando Gilead and Pakal are the same guy. In any case, Rolando, keep your bloody research for yourself, I am capable enough of doing mine. I have presented my arguments. Look at what you said:

Wow, you have no reading comprehension skills. You can’t even get my nick right. BTW, when are you going to complain about my argument, why don’t you provide some evidence to back up yours. Pakal provided sourced material, so why don’t you stop insulting our intellegence here.

You are quite a real fool if you think this argument explains the Baalbek anomaly. Are you suggesting the ancients count on similar technology to lift those masive blocks? If that is the case, you are giving the kiss of death to your own argument.

It’s time for you to either put up of shut up. If the ancients could not have built these megaliths using their own technology, then what technology did they use? If they didn’t build them, then who did? Aliens? Atlanteans? Some white Anglo-Saxon God?

The concept of lifting heavy objects is something so simple, that a child could understand it. If you truly knew what the hell you are talking about, you would understand that the concepts of pulleys and levers are farely simple concepts to understand and they would have been availible to the ancients. When you add enough elbow grease, you can move anything. Also, there is carpentry and masonry techniques that were developed then that are still in use today, because they are so simple and they work. You have provided absolutely no evidence to counter this except that no modern crane can lift those heavy blocks, which does not impress me any. Hell, my example of not having to have a crane to lift heavy objects went right over your head. So, that proves to me you don’t know what you are talking about.

Sorry, Incognitus, you fail.

As an actual Archaeologist i can atest to many an artifact being swept under the carpet by the academic establishment when it deos not fit the reigning paradigm. Examples abound. You do not need to be credentialed to have a fully rounded perspective on any subject, just an interest and an ability to think critically. The willingness to blindly accept information from so-called experts displayed on this forum is a measure of the sucess of the indoctrination system that is erroneously tremed education

ooops, mispelling ot termed in last sentence. before all you pedants jump down my throat.

So, Ragnarok, how may tertiary flakes did you see swept under the cover?

Hi guys, I m still waiting to see what you think of the two links I posted above, both leading to a conference that Hancock and Beauval had a while back. The subjects of them isn’t really about the Olmec mystery, though it is mentionned too.
I ask this because this page isn’t about the olmec. This page is about Hancock being a worthless ignorant who’s name should disappear in History before his evil lies and distortions get more attention, or a smart guy who had the balls to bring something new on the table, when the greatest minds of History have failed to explain an abondant amount of mysteries and inconsistencies about our past, our history and legacy. If you cant even agree about these amazing abnormalities and the questions they implicates then there s no point talking at all.

So here you go, I m not a full on fan of hancock, I m ready to think he is wrong and a liar ect ect if anyone can show it without acting like a little arrogant child not ready yet to reconsider the validity of his knowledge without leaving his pride aside.
And as far as I know, there s no reason to assume that the olmecs depicted accurately people from across the sea “just because they had a lively imagination”. Really? The lack of real foundations based on research and reason behing such statement is baffling, so you better show off some thinking and study of your subject if you attack a person like hancock, boy. I ve been looking out for critcics about him for a while now and this is as far as it gets; low level statements from frustrated little kids full of themselves.
So, please watch those videos if you wanna talk, and go over every point which you think is absurdity. Then show me something solid that proves it. Simple. Oh and please, avoid stuff like “The OCT theory cannot work because you have to put the map upside down”, you gotta be really stupid or blind to brush aside such amazing possibilty and the many other reasons to think so, just because it doesnt fit the current way of thinking about maps in the 21th century, because if you wanna recreate the sky the way you see it from the ground you dont need to invert anything. I couldnt find any real, solid critics about Hancock, so you guys can hopefully show me some good stuff?

Watch these videos, then come back and show some good critics, we ll see what happens.

Shibeee

sanji i to came to this site for exactly the same reasons has u and come to the same conclusion .watched both videos thanks for that .my first introduction to bauval who i think is both intelligent and honest man listening to him now on information machine try watching black genesis by bauval and dont waste your time arguing with pacal think him rude and offensive and blind to exploration of facts

Yeh it s probably pointless to discuss with those guys, because in the end I m just gonna repeat what hancock and others have already said, and I m gonna read here the same critics Ive seen, which sometimes are legitimate, but never good, solid, proven, unbreakable reasons to completely dismiss hancock and every single aspect of his work. In the end, what he says has been going on for a quite a while through history, it s not brand new, so that debate has already been going on for ages.
Maybe because people like me haven’t yet spend a massive amount of time reading work to boost their knowledge, intelligence and ego, that what might be actually misleading or wrong, it s easier to get on with the “outside the box” way of thinking.
I wont go into details because they all say it better than me, but his position about C14 dating process for ancient monuments, his position about the Ice Age and its many mysteries, about maps found around the globe showing what might be locations unknown at the time, about ancient monuments that seem to have atronomical aspects to it, about underwater structures looking suspicious, about drawings, texts, interpretation of some ancient texts. and so on and so on….
There is just so much that you cant just ignore all of this, even when “it’s not a prefect match”, “most specialists disagree “, “he isnt a professional” and blah blah blah blah.
There are obviously a lot yet to discover about ourselves and our past, and that dude and his mates definitely bring something worth looking into. If a lot of experts of our time are against even debating or considering all this with a new eye, then so be it. It happened countless times before. Doesnt mean we should blindly believe people like him, but if you sit on your books and ignore such caracter, then you really have shit in your eyes and your ears, and your slowing down the learning process of mankind. Anyway, I m wasting my time typing all this, lets agree to disagree.
Guys I m still waiting to hear your opinion about those two videos

Kevin you say:

sanji i to came to this site for exactly the same reasons has u and come to the same conclusion .watched both videos thanks for that .my first introduction to bauval who i think is both intelligent and honest man listening to him now on information machine try watching black genesis by bauval and dont waste your time arguing with pacal think him rude and offensive and blind to exploration of facts.

Bauval is not worth taking the slightest bit seriously along with Hancock. The whole Orion correlation thing as been exploded long ago. You are not aware that the consilation of Orion when imposed on Pyramids at Giza and the Neighbouting area don’t match up. But then Bauval’s a joke. Have you bothered to read up on why the majority of Geologists do not accept a early date for the Sphinx as suggested by Schoch? Or how about how Bauval and Hancock were gunning for a 10500 B.C.E., date for ther Sphinx and basically ignoring that even Schoch gave a date after 8000 B,C.E. Of course do you accept the idea that the great pyramid was planned in 10500 B.C.E., although built thousands of years later to reflect the date of 10500 B.C.E. Which by the way Hancock got from Edgar Cayce, (the sleeping prophet). Both of them have been in the past quite ready to accuse Egyptologists of lying, of fraud, fabrication and forgery. In Fingerprints of the Gods Hancock accused an 19th century Egyptologist of fabricating Khufu’s name on stone blocks found in the chambers above the Kings chamber. Hancock has since retracted this baseless accusation but he continues to blither on about wicked Archeologists supressing the truth.

As for your last comment given the quite vicious names I’v e been called here I find you thinking me rude / offensive hilarious. I’ve merely said you guys were ignorant and clueless. Which you most evidently are. As for blind to exploration of the facts. Depends. If you mean the made up nonsense of Hancock and Bauval; that is speculation and fantasy not fact. But then you guys seem to have absolutely no interest in doing any sort of real research at all, but just mouth whatever Bauval and Hancock pull out of their asses.

Sanji you say:

Yeh it s probably pointless to discuss with those guys, because in the end I m just gonna repeat what hancock and others have already said, and I m gonna read here the same critics Ive seen, which sometimes are legitimate, but never good, solid, proven, unbreakable reasons to completely dismiss hancock and every single aspect of his work. In the end, what he says has been going on for a quite a while through history, it s not brand new, so that debate has already been going on for ages.

Yep the debate between the cranks and wackjobs as been going on for ages. Almost all of it in the minds of the cranks. Thank you for indicating that you have no desire to do any real research.

As for your request for unbreakable reason to dismiss Hancock. What about the simple fact that his lost super civilization seems to have vanished without a trace. How about the fact that each and everyone of the anomolies he points to is almost always asa a “prosaic” explaination. How about Hancocks conspiracy mongering. I should not forget to note Hancock’s 2012 boosterism.

From Baalbak, (built in Roman times), to the Piri Re’is map Hancock recycles mysteries that are not mysteries.

Maybe because people like me haven’t yet spend a massive amount of time reading work to boost their knowledge, intelligence and ego, that what might be actually misleading or wrong, it s easier to get on with the “outside the box” way of thinking.

Yep musn’t have ones head clogged with knowledge it might inhibit’s one ability to swallow woo. I guess ignorance is a blessed state and knowing nothing is cool. Oh and Hancock doesn’t think outside the box his thought is firmly in the area of twentieth century crank Archaeology, he is right up their with Von Daniken, and esspecially Robert Charroux, (One Hundred Thousand Years of Man’s Unknown History).

I wont go into details because they all say it better than me, but his position about C14 dating process for ancient monuments, his position about the Ice Age and its many mysteries, about maps found around the globe showing what might be locations unknown at the time, about ancient monuments that seem to have atronomical aspects to it, about underwater structures looking suspicious, about drawings, texts, interpretation of some ancient texts. and so on and so on….
There is just so much that you cant just ignore all of this, even when “it’s not a prefect match”, “most specialists disagree “, “he isnt a professional” and blah blah blah blah.

Hancock’s position about Carbon 14 and how it is used to date monuments is deeply ignorant. Hancock never seems to get the fact that the materials that are associated with the momuments are dated. But then how Archaeologists do that would require him to read some of the many texts about Carbon 14 dating and how to use it. For dating methods see Archaeology, Second Edition, Renfrew, Colin, THames and Hudson, London, 1996.

He could also use with reading a book about climate history. Say Climate Change in Prehistory, Burroughs, William J., Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 2005.

And of course has mentioned above Hancock’s “mysteries” are almost always not mysteries at all.

It is quite easy to ignore most of it, because it is generally not a mystery, and what little is “mysterious” does not require a unknown super civilization or aliens. I should mention here that foe a time Hancock supported the idea of alien monuments on Mars, he as backed away from that I hope.

I lost any respect for Hancock from reading the sections of <Fingerprints of the Gods (A deliberate play on Von Daniken’s Chariots of the Gods, in my opinion.), from his shoddy chapters on the Maya and Tiwanaku. In th Tiwanaku chapter he almost entirely, (except for a throw away line) ignores the conventional date of the site and instead advances a far out date based on astronomical alighments deduced from recently reconstructed buildings. These dates contradict dozens of Carbon 14 results along with ceramic, and stratigraphy studies to say nothing of ethno-historical data all of which date the site 200-1000 C.E (A.D.). Please see Ancient Tiwanku, Janusek, John Wayne, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 2008, The Tiwanaku, Kolata, Alan L., Blackwell, Oxford, 1993.

As for the Maya please see The Ancient Maya, Sixth Edition, Sharer, Robert J, & Traxler, Loa P, Stanford University Press, Stanford CA, 2006, pp. 102-120, for the Mayan calander. It also shows why Hancock’s discussion of it is a crock. Hancock’s discussion of the Sarcophagus lid in the tomb of Pacal at Palenque is also totally bogus.

There are obviously a lot yet to discover about ourselves and our past, and that dude and his mates definitely bring something worth looking into. If a lot of experts of our time are against even debating or considering all this with a new eye, then so be it. It happened countless times before. Doesnt mean we should blindly believe people like him, but if you sit on your books and ignore such caracter, then you really have shit in your eyes and your ears, and your slowing down the learning process of mankind. Anyway, I m wasting my time typing all this, lets agree to disagree.
Guys I m still waiting to hear your opinion about those two videos

Thank you for the Galileo gambit, the typical cliche of cranks everywhere. However for every Galileo who was right there were 10,000 cranks who were way wrong.

As for seeing it with a new eye? Nope! Its the same old same old processed woo. In the 19th century Ignatius Donnelly was touting woo in his Atlantis: The Antediluvian World, in the early twethieth century we had Edgar Cayce and in the late 60’s and into the 70’s we had Von Daniken, along with countless others. It is the same old crap served for another generation.

As for shit in eyes and ears. Since people like Hancock listen to other woo miesters and ignire reams and reams of data while continuing their diet of woo. It is clear who has shit in their eyes and ears and it is Hancock and those who believe like him.

Although it is nice to know that you think the hard won knowledge of the past won over the past century or so is shit.

Some more reading:

Invented Knowledge, Fritze, Ronald, H, Reaktion Books, London, 2009.

Ancient Astraunauts, Cosmic Collisions and other Popular THeories about Man’s Past, Stiebing, William H, Prometheus Books, Buffalo NY, 1984.

Giza: The Truth, Lawton, Ian & Ogilvie-Herald, Chris, Invisible Cities Press, Montpelier Vermont, 2001.

P.S. The two links are to films that are merely the same dull old nostrums that have been coming from those two for quite sometime.

Sanji as an example of Hancock’s problem “common sense” is a comment he makes that Khufu’s hieroglyph being found on stone blocks inside the great pyramid is meaningless, and further that they were possibly forged. The quality of Hancock’s scholarship is clear from that comment.

First Hancock fudges were the marks were found and ignores that they were quarry marks not just marks. In otherwords blocks marked for transportation to a building site. Also the blocks with the quarry mark were found in a chamber above the Kings Chamber in the great pyramid that had been sealed from the building of the Great Pyramid until the 19th century. Hancock manages to nicely fudge that it must mean, most likely, that the pyramid was built for a King named Khufu.

Hancock’s dismissal of the “marks” a a possible forgery by the Egyptologist / explorer Vyse. This is nonsense. Oh and it now appears that the quarry “marks” contine round the corners into the crevacies between blocks. So much for forgery.

Of course Hancock gets the idea that the marks may be forgeries from author Zecharia Sitchin in his book Stairway to Heaven.

An excellent source for info on this is pp. 95-113, of Giza The Truth, by Ian Lawton and Chris Ogilvie-Hera;d, Invisible Cities Press, Montpelier VT, 2001. The above book is of especial interest in that the authors are very sympathetic to “alternative” history and archaeology. The same book is excellent on the date of the Great Pyramid, accepting the traditional date of Khufu’s reign c. 2600 B.C.E. I could of course mention carbon 14 dating results. Hancock also ignores the very clear line of development of pyramid construction from Djoser’s Step Pyramid to the Great Pyramid. Hancock leaves out the Red Pyramid, the Bent Pyramid, the Pyramid of Medium and a couple of pyramids which were started and not completed. Which shows a definite development of technique. For more Read The Pyramids of egypt, by I.E.S. Edwards, Penguin Books, London, 1970, and multiple further editions.

The same dissesction can be performed on comment after comment Hancock makes.

I m making a cool post, will take a bit of time because I m not english and I want it to be comprehensible. So please keep an eye on this page.
Ive just read all the comments on this page, and somehow if you step back from it, arguments for and against hancock (and those type of ideas) all make sense at some point. I want to debate a bit more with you guys, because it will help me to get a better opinion. But clearly, there are A LOT of really,really, really odd things about the ancient world. This fact on its own should make all of us accept that there is definitely something strange about our past history, because otherwise pages and discussions like the ones presented here wouldn’t exist, or need to. Quite brilliant, I find this very exciting.
Will be back asap.

Damn my computer doesn’t work anymore! Humm I m going back home for Christmas so I ll do it from there, I ll post within the next 2/3 weeks.
Btw I posted the above after a heavy night, what I meant to say is that I wanna present a few odd things to you guys and see what you think.
Speak soon.

I thought I should read the infamous FOG before I post anything else, so I m doing that. I m halfway through it now, will be done in, lets say, one month or so.
Easy guys, speak soon

Any novice can look at those stone heads and see that they are Amerindian. I was once fooled into believing the supposed “Negroid” features until I saw pictures of Natives from the region that resembled those stone heads. People who say the giant heads look Negroid have flawed racialist views. This is simply 15th – 19th Century perceptions of race. This poses a problem for Hancock and the Afrocentrics, because all of these claims stem from the “opinion” of an alleged African phenotype.

It’s great that there are experts in the field but we can argue this without them. Not saying we don’t need them, just saying that if Afrocentrics and the Hancocks of the world can invent junk history then we can debunk them easily because they only have opinion.

The Olmecs were Amerindian. There is no mystery to who they were and there is no proof of any African influence.

Fallacious argument is fallacious. Ever heard of the mitochondrial Eve? Keep calling leading researchers “cult-archaeologists” and “afro-centric racists” if that’s all you can muster as proof that they are wrong. Please don’t use facts or do research for yourself, just keep labeling people you don’t agree with.

bohemianexile you say:

Fallacious argument is fallacious. Ever heard of the mitochondrial Eve? Keep calling leading researchers “cult-archaeologists” and “afro-centric racists” if that’s all you can muster as proof that they are wrong. Please don’t use facts or do research for yourself, just keep labeling people you don’t agree with.

What does Mitochondrial Eve have to do with the fact that Olmec statutes look like modern day Amerindian natives of the area? There is NO need to postulate that the statutes are depictions of Africans. There is also no evidence Archaeologically of an African presence in Olmec culture / society. Calling Hancock and other pseudo-scientists researchers is of course hilarious. Just look at the bibliographies of their books, full of references to all the familiar tropes and crap of yes “cult” and “pseudo-scientist” cant. As for proof they are wrong it exists in abundance. Everytthing from genetic studies to archaeology shows they are wrong.

It is a fallacious arguement to assume, and it is an assumption, that because the statutes “look like” African they are Africans esspecially since there are people in the area today, Amerindians, who look like the statutes. Calling people like Hancock “researchers” is in my opinion deeply insulting to those real researchers who work in the field. Perhaps you should read some of their work. May I recomend the following.

Olmec Archaeology and Early Mesoamerica, Christopher A. Pool, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 2007.
The Olmecs, Richard A. Diehl, Thames and Hudson, London, 2004.
The Ancient Kingdoms of Mexico, Nigel Davies, Penguin Books, London, 1982.
Mesoamerica Goes Public: Early Ceremonial Centers, Leaders and Communities, in Mesoamerican Archaeology, Ed. Julia A. Hendon & Rosemary A. Joyce, Blackwell Pub. Oxford, 2004, pp. 43-72.
Mexico: From the Olmecs to the Aztecs, 6th Edition, Michael D. Coe & Rex Koontz, Thames and Hudson, London, 2008, pp. 39-100.
First Peoples in a New World, David J. Meltzer, University of California Press, Berkeley CA, 2009, pp. 184-207.
Art, Ritual, and Rulership in the Olmec World, F. Kent Reilly, in The Ancient Civilizations of Mesoamerica, Ed. Michael E. Smith & Marilyn A. Masson, Blackwell Pub., Oxford, 2000.
CA Forum on Anthropology: Robbing Native American Cultures: Van Sertima’s Afrocentricity and the Olmecs, Gabriel Haslip-Viera & Bernard Ortiz de Montellano, & Warren Barbour, in Current Anthropology, v. 38, No. 3, Jun. 1997, pp. 419-441.
The Spanish Entrada: A Model for Assessing Claims of Pre-Columbian between the Old and New World, Kenneth L. Feder, in North American Archaeologist, v. 15, No. 2, Ed. Roger W. Moeller, Baywood Pub. Co. Inc., Amityville NY, 1994, pp. 147-166.

Opps! Kent Reilly’s article is on pp. 369-399 of The Ancient Civilizations of Mesoamerica.

They were outsiders who immigrated to the Olman area via boat, most likely as sailors or passengers on transoceanic voyages that went on for probably hundreds of years.

So they knew the secret of immortality as well?

“these Native American craftsmen had lively imaginations”

A bold statement. But condescending. So they were not artists? ‘Just’ imaginative craftsmen? Are you sure they were men? Is it really your opinion that ancient artists (or craftspeople) were depicting only the products of their imaginations, rather than cultural-historical objects and ideas of importance? Objects such as statuary are rarely products of whimsy, as you suggest.

It’s also an ahistorical statement made to imply a degree of unthinking racism in your subject. Were the Olmecs ‘Native American’? They might come to be considered so, hundreds of years later. But what did they call themselves?

If there’s the possibility that ancient transoceanic travel was going on at the time, there’s the possibility that these imaginative people were carving from life.

My other objection is that the statue head on the left looks to be mongoloid, rather than negroid. It seems you’ve been directed by your source. Have another look and see what you see.

I’m waiting for someone to come up with a role for the Tunguska Event in all of this. Hmm, must call my publisher.

Well, Aprilista. if the head on the left looks mongoloid, that makes sense, because that’s what the Olmecs were. I don’t think anyone has a clue what the Olmecs called themselves – they didn’t leave a written language, unlike the Maya.

Aprilista,

Thank you for such an incisive post. As a parody of self-righteous political correctness and epistemic relativism, it is both subtle and amusing. I especially enjoyed the part about needing to know whether or not these inclusive and ethnocentric Olmec sculptresses considered themselves Native American. (I’m guessing it was an understated reference on those who pander to Native American creation myths.)

“those who pander to Native American creation myths.”

Do you mean those who comprehend the cultures of others?

What creation myths do you prefer people to pander to?

Aprilista,

Do you mean those who comprehend the cultures of others?

No. I mean those who pander to Native American creation myths.

Apologies if I’ve missed the obvious, but I don’t get what you mean by ‘pander to’ in this context.

Re ‘Afrocentric historians’.
Geography doesn’t seem to be a strong point with these charlatans. When you consider that the maritime achievements of the West Africans were so limited that transport to the Cape Verde Islands (discovered by the Portuguese) was beyond them, it seems ridiculous to suppose that they could have traveled many times that distance and got all the way to Central America !

“What creation myths do you prefer people to pander to?”

Oh, the irony of this question appearing on a site dedicated to dubunking nonsensical myths of all shapes and sizes.

And also the PC gibberish in aprilista’s comments is very amusing too. Maybe it’s time for counterknowledge to mention the Alan Sokal hoax, just in case some who read this blog are unfamiliar with it.

“PC gibberish”

As I recall, I was gently implying that, without further evidence, it’s rash to make assumptions about who was involved in producing culture in an ancient civilisation.

… Historical and archaeological inquiry is best undertaken with an open mind. Preconceptions and excess cultural baggage may hamper one’s reading of the evidence on the ground.

And, of course, there’s a difference between close-minded people and those who bring experience to bear.

So, in summary, the author’s beliefs are just as speculative as Hancock’s.

“blah blah blah… lively imaginations” – now that’s science in action folks!!!

Isn’t a more likely explanation that the Olmecs had encountered some African people or, possibly, the Olmecs were African?

What’s a “cult archaeologist” anyhow????

Obviously Hatcher isn’t a professional archaeologist but an experienced traveller who has visited loads of sites. But hey, if having your own unorthodox ideas damns you as cultist, then we may as well go back to the dark ages.

Now I geddit – the delicious double meaning in counterknowledge does actually refer to your own mission to stop or “counter” rival forms of information or “knowledge”. Correct me if I;m wrong.

Aprilista,

As I recall, I was gently implying that, without further evidence, it’s rash to make assumptions about who was involved in producing culture in an ancient civilisation.

Well, no, that’s not all you were doing. For one thing, you accused the author of the original post of racism and sexism for referring to the creators of these artefacts as “craftsmen” and not “artists” – and you did so despite the fact that the word “craftsmen” can mean “artisan” or “artist”, and, its suffix notwithstanding, can be gender neutral. In other words, you were detecting these prejudices in “homeopathic concentrations” – i.e. where they don’t exist.

Judean Peoples Front,

So, in summary, the author’s beliefs are just as speculative as Hancock’s.

Well that might indeed be a summary. Quite what on Earth it’s a summary of, however, remains something of a mystery.

Ed. I chided the OP for condescension and rehearsing ahistorical thinking.

It’s important to remember that what you think and what others think may often differ.

It’s important to remember that what you think and what others think may often differ.

Exquisite.

It’s off topic, but I’m wondering how the 9/11 “truthers” are going to deal with this.

A better explanation for some Olmec statues looking Chinese is that Olmecs and other Native Americans were of Asian ancestry. Some Indians look very Chinese. As to the “Negroid” features of the Olmec heads (the football player heads) one explanation is that the rulers were highly inbred and this led to deformities.

Saw the word “negroid,” clicked expecting evidence of dread C’thuhu’s awakening.

Left disappointing, screaming in tongues.

Glad to see that white people still firmly believe in white supremacy. It will inevitably be their downfall. smh

Guys, Seriously, put your cocks away and the rulers down.
It stings when someone one-ups your opinions that you’ve worked so hard to mould but you’re never gonna know that you’re 100% correct in your idea of the truth so keep the floor open for alternative discussion points without the need to re-educate.

Childress puts forward a selection of truths and facts. Some may argue that the order in which he does this is created to bring the audience to a shared conclusion, whether factual or nay, but he asks us “How is this possible?”, rather than stating it to be undeniable. Creating a discussion point and thats what we’re doing is it not?……Or were you in fact roaming around a few millenia ago with the Meso-Americans to be so sure of yourselves.

Plus he has an extremely silly voice for a narrator that keeps me listening.
Sounds like someone from South park.

Two things, there is no evidence that there was any trans-Atlantic voyages 2500 years ago, the time period that the Olmecs live. Then, all the human remains that were associated with the Olmecs and the ones that built the heads, had similar DNA to the people who live there today. Also, they is greater variation between them and people from West Africa than from the people who Populate Eastern Siberia.

You might want to listen to these cult-archaeologists than philanthropist like Graham Hancock. Also, I do find it racist to say that an indiginous culture could not have built monuments when in fact, they could have. That is exactly what Graham Hancock is saying.

Sorry, I meant real Archaeology, not cult-archaeology.

Indians don’t come out of a cookie-cutter. Both heads look like people I know; members of the same tribe. Have any of you been to a reservation?

Why do some of you people hate your African ancestry so much? If you cannot disprove the evidence given, accept it. The hate many of you have for your own ancestry will not change the facts.

It is really pathetic that some people in this world despite access to the information technology thats avalible to them continue to express stupid racist denials about the acomplishments of ancient african peoples and what they created in this world. I just laff at their ongoing willingness to be ignorant. The olmecs were black africans and it’s nothing you or anybody else can do anything about it.

Olmecs were an American Indian people. Afrocentrics are in dire need to make up for their lack of progress and/or ignorance as to who their direct ancestors were. Also missing is a genuine connection with any African peoples.

To Multiplesourses and Ken Williams Sr. There is no evidence of a Tranatlantic crossing between Africa and Central America at any time in history before 1500 AD. There is no evidence of there being Africans in Central American at anytime before 1500 AD. The only evidence that you have that the heads were built by Africans is in the way they look, and that can also be explained without having to use an outside source. “Van Sertima’s (the man who came up with the hypothesis) asserts that they are clearly African in appearance, and indeed they do possess full lips and broad noses. Van Sertima, however, ignores the fact that many of the Olmec heads also have flat faces like American Indians, not prognathic profiles (jutting-out lower faces) like Africans. He also chooses not to see what appear to be epacatnthic folds on the eyelids of the statues-these are typical of Old World Asians and American Indians.” -Ken Feder; Frauds, Myths, and Mysteries.

Lastly, about being racist? Is it not racist to take away the accomplishments of one culture and give it to another? Saying that the Olmecs did not build those heads is like saying the Egyptians did not build the pyramids.

To RolandofGilead and other skeptics on this subject of the Olmecs: First, I completely agree that taking and ignoring the accomplishments of native peoples anywhere in this world is a crime against humanity . The entire western world and 99 percent of it’s academic institutions to this day still maintains a mindset of eurocentric superiority which reinforces it’s belief systems through every media source avaliable and the school institutions on every level. Second, there are and have been scores of historians thoughout generations who support the research on ancient africans crossing the world’s oceans and establishing settlements of different kinds in many lands.Third,
there are hundreds of ancient artifacts that are linked to Africa that have been discoverd in Mexico and are on display in their many museums. Fourth, now if you and others don’t want to do the proper research and read more , that’s your intellectual problem. Fifth, Dr. Ivan Van Sertima and all of his peers on this unique and fascinating subject will all be vindicated.

“First, I completely agree that taking and ignoring the accomplishments of native peoples anywhere in this world is a crime against humanity . The entire western world and 99 percent of it’s academic institutions to this day still maintains a mindset of eurocentric superiority which reinforces it’s belief systems through every media source avaliable and the school institutions on every level.”

Uhm, No. Despite the Eurocentric ideals that I may espouse, (WTF does that even mean???) that still doesn’t change the fact there is no evidence what-so-ever that African’s built the Heads, nor do the heads even look African. You see, there is a thing called fact, which does not care what country I’m from.

“Second, there are and have been scores of historians thoughout generations who support the research on ancient africans crossing the world’s oceans and establishing settlements of different kinds in many lands.”

Like who? Graham Hancock? Van Danikan? Robert Schlock? None of these men are historians or archaeologist. They have constantly ignored all evidence that calls their pet hypothesis into doubt, and continiously push irrelevant points that have been debunked. Not to mention that Graham Hancock believes the world is coming to an end on Dec, 12 2012. They are no different from the 9/11 truthers or creationists.

Also, I would like to add that just because somebody can build a raft and sail it across the Atlantic, does not mean it was being done 3000 years ago. I’ve got news for ya, the confederates during the civil war had the materials and technology to make liquid fueled rockets. However, there is no evidence that they did. That is how we know they didn’t. Where is your evidence of Africans or Asians crossing 3000 years ago?

“Third, there are hundreds of ancient artifacts that are linked to Africa that have been discoverd in Mexico and are on display in their many museums.”

Really? Can I see a link to these artifacts, maybe some context as to where and when these artifacts are found? Yes, it might be interesting to find a Roman coin in Maine, but it doesn’t mean that the Romans were there when the coin was found in the context of an 18th century farmstead. There are plenty of artifacts that come from around the world found in the Americas. The only problem, is that they are found well within the context of the Contact Period. There is a reason that Archaeologists note stratigraphy of a site. That is how they date the site.

“Fourth, now if you and others don’t want to do the proper research and read more , that’s your intellectual problem.”

I don’t have a problem. I listen to people who have meticulously mapped, surveyed, and detailed the site, not someone who looks at a picture and then decides what it looks like.

“Fifth, Dr. Ivan Van Sertima and all of his peers on this unique and fascinating subject will all be vindicated.”

For some reason, I highly doubt that. I quoted an actual archaeologist. What do you have.

Dear Mr. RolandofGilead,

An Ancient African Proverb: Lies can run for years, but the truth can catch them in a day.

Keep living until you find out !!!!!

Dear Ken Williams Sr.

Archaeology deals with facts. If you want truth, I’m sure you can find a philosophy class somewhere.

I’m still waiting for you to produce the evidence for you to actually back up your claim. A quotation about truth is not evidence, and it proves to me that you really don’t know what you are talking about.

There is one cure for the absurd idea that the Olmecs were “Africans”. Just look at some pictures of contemporary Native Indian inhabitants of the region. Guess what. You find many that look like the”Negroid” heads and others that look like the “Mongoloid” and others that look like the “Semitic” heads. As been said before the evidence for such contact is minimal to zero. Further it apears that Olmec civilization emeerged from pre-existing village cultures. Oh and when Van Sertima originally suggested his idea Olmec civilization was thought to emerge c. 800 B.C.E., and the source an Nubian dominated Egypt, the date is now pushing 1500 B.C.E. and earlier which throws a wrench in that idea.

As for keeping you mind open for new ideas. Well if you ignore vast amounts of data the way Childress does your hardly having a open mind. Oh and please explain why anyone should take this idea the slightest bit seriously when the only “evidence” in support of it is sculptures of people who look like natives who live in the region today?

Finally, someone else who thinks to look at the actual people involved. Thank you, Pacal.

Two things, there is no evidence that there was any trans-Atlantic voyages 2500 years ago, the time period that the Olmecs live. Then, all the human remains that were associated with the Olmecs and the ones that built the heads, had similar DNA to the people who live there today. Also, they is greater variation between them and people from West Africa than from the people who Populate Eastern Siberia.
You might want to listen to these cult-archaeologists than philanthropist like Graham Hancock. Also, I do find it racist to say that an indiginous culture could not have built monuments when in fact, they could have. That is exactly what Graham Hancock is saying.

The best explanation for the so-called “negroid” traits in Olmec statue and in some Olmec crania is that there were two waves of humans migrating from Asia. The earliest wave of humans from Asia resembled modern Melaneseans and Africans the latter wave resembled so-called Mongoloids. Both types lived in Meso-America at least until the age of the Spanish conquest.

‘Plenty of other Olmec statues look as if they depict people from other parts of the world because these Native American craftsmen had lively imaginations. It really is as simple as that.’
Then i stopped reading…

Why are these phenomena easier to argue about than actually research? If I were to buy a car; I could stay at home, looking at photos online, reading anecdotes about the car, and so on…
or- I can actually LOOK at the car, drive it, and so on.
The persons involved in it’s design and production are irrelevant.

IMPORTANT: Mr. Damian Thompson has not ‘driven this car’, but has only collated an opinion borne of his research, which he put forward as fact (and with an inherent meanness that is very off-putting, might I add)…if Mr. Thomson has actually visited the Land of the Olmecs, done a visual survey of the current inhabitants of the area, and interiewed the area’s primary archaeological personnel- I formally apologize, and heartily so.
Mr. Hancock has test-driven the car.
He’s been to Cenral America numerous times, seen almost all of the heads and other important artefacts-touched them!- and spoken wth numerous local CREDENTIALed EXPERTS.
It is painfully obvious that Damien hasn’t read the material he condemns.
Mr. Thomson wastes everyone’s time arguing something that can be conclusively proven with a minimum of effort.
Of course, the local artisans had the imagination, talent, and technology to craft these heads.
I personally believe there was an African influence on the locals, but that this influence was via ET intervention. THIS IS MY OPINION, as I have yet to ‘drive’ that car. (and probably never will)
Damien-intelligent folks (such as yourself…i AM a fan!) should never state their opinion (or even other people’s opinions) as fact. To do so is immature, irresposible, and damaging to the collective forward momentum of the human race.
PS-Aprilista, my opinion is that you have such a sexy brain!
peace to all-
RA Boesenberg

Graham Hancock is great, I really like him. He is not some lunatic with weird ideas based on nothing. I dont like the comparison with Danniken, who has ideas based on nearly nothing, or Zitchin, but not hancock. And his ideas and theories should be looked into because they have solid bones to it, they could also help us to understand certain aspect of the amazing mysteries of Human Civilisation. And a lot of academics are starting to realize that now. And millions of people around the world too.
This is how our understandings evolved, we always reviewed our own ideas in the past, even if it is painfull, to find new truth and make new discoveries. Humans make mistake, and the fact that we might have misunderstood and misinterpreted some of the legacy of the Ancient World is not something that should be ruled out, but considered. Too much evidences to be ignored. Look back in History and it really wouldn’t be the first time that we got it wrong, really wrong, until someone said “hang on a minute, what about……” Examples are way too many to be worth named here. Come on, we were convinced that the planet was flat! It would be arrogant to think that we haven’t made such mistake again, or that we won’t.
I think archeologists and egyptologists don’t like that fact that non-professionals could have seen something they missed for years, and there is a pride issue here. If they all worked together we would make huge progress in these fields.
Hancock might be wrong, and he doesn’t claim to provide the absolute thruth, but instead he suggests a new approach, a different point of view. Instead of stupid attacks and pitiful attempts to ridicule him, there should be a real debate.
And seriously, if you have a minimum of common sense, an open mind and a certain obvious logic, you will see that he has a point. A Big one, too big to be dismissed as fantasy.
Anyway, blind people can stay blind, they dont read and then they talk……silly. Sad.
Hancock is onto something, and wether you like it or not, that something is out there.
Among many things, I really wonder about that Yonagumi structure, what about that? Fantasy? LOL

RA Boesenberg and Sanji’s posts are hilarious. Such cultivated and worked up ignorance. Yes Hancock talked to the experts and proceeded to ignore practically all that they said to him. His books are filled with fantasy and deep ignorance. The section on Tiwanku is esspecially funny.

Hancock goes on for pages about Tiwanku being over 10 thousand years old while taking barely any notice of th fact that practically everyone who as worked on the site dates it to c. 300-1000 C.E. (A.D.).

Olmec sites have benn excavated and NO remains indicating an African presence ot ET have been found. There are of course plenty of remains of pre Olmec village cultures indicating and showing the development of Olmec civilization with no indication of Old World influence.

Critical literature on Hancock is abundant and indicates that he is a distorter and fantastist.

Hancock as simply driven his car over a cliff, probably because he as self-blinded himself. He as also openly admited that he is a one sided researcher out to defend his “client”.

Well i have talked to Mesoamerican Archaeologists and specialists and with no exceptions they regard Hancock as a crank.

So Boesenberg you think the Olmec were influenced by ET? That of course only shows me that you are deeply ignorant about Olmec archaeology.

As for Sanji, well what you said about Yonagumi is amusing. Haen’t done much research on it, it seems. Except of course possibly true believer material.

Thanks for the laughs guys.

Oh and please explain to me why the statues look like modern Indians who live in the area if they are suppossed to be of Africans?

Well reading my comment again, I do sound a bit like a simple – minded hippy. Right, let me precise a few things, I am not a full-on Hancock fan. I do not know a huge amount about him, but I saw “Quest for the Lost Civilisation”, and I read “Supernatural”, an absolutely amazing book, unrelated to his usual topics it seems. I really didn’t see what in there makes him a worthless ignorant. History, as we know it, is probably quite distorted and incomplete already.
After this I decided to look further into his work and theories. I have been a bit surprised by the range of his ideas and even found that sometimes he goes quite far actually. He made me think about a trigger-happy cowboy shooting in all directions in the hope of hiting a target.

Also, the next thing I did, immediately, was to researched his critics. This is how I came on this page.
Quite frankly, from what I ve read so far, most critics do indeed show flaws in his ideas, and he is probably wrong on some of them, no doubt about that. But what I also see is people picking on details – but flaws -, in a speech fuelled with bad faith, arrogance and bitterness. Then they dismiss the entire caracter, the theory talked about, as well as his other ideas and then brand him an amateur, lunatic, pseudo archeologosist and so on. And this is where I think it’s wrong, even with flaws, his ideas are still quite interesting, still valid enough to be worth further serious studies, and especially the general frame of mind behind it, something that his opponents and established theories do not take in count, at all. His ideas about Egypt and the Orion Correlation Theory is so obvious that I don’t understand why they are not taken in count by people that still haven’t manage to solve the mystery themselve.
He is obviously very clever and down to earth, his appraoch and the way he thinks is what I like; It deserves attention and debate.

And usually, lets face it, the established ideas he is fightning against most definitely leave room for plenty of inconsistencies, mysteries and MANY legitimate questions to be raised, don’t you think?
Even if he might be wrong, he has a certain angle on these subjects that science ignores, and his view would certainly help. I think we need people like him to shake things up a bit, and progress. Because this is how we alwasy did.

Regarding that Yonagumi structure, I don’t know what you mean by “True believer material”. What I believe is that we have here an underwater structure that has the same base lenght of the Great Pyramid (not completely sure about that), that is aligned North / South, and seems man-made. And last time it was above water was 8 to 12000 years ago, a time where no one on earth could have had the technology or knowledge to do it. I find this fact, on its own, taken apart from any context or theory, is quite amazing, isn’t it?. It is not garanteed that it is man made, but in my opinion this is just a matter of time. Japan’s top marine geologist and many other seems to think that this possibilty is high enough to bet their own career on it. I have seen many pics of it, do you really think that nature did that?? Not impossible, but mathematically, scientifically and logicaly, it seems quite unlikely. The odds speak volume.

Anyway, about this page’s subject, I had no specific opinion about it so far, apart that this is just another weird subject to study. So Hancock promotes garbage about it? Ah cool, why then? Your answer is “because these Native American craftsmen had lively imaginations. It really is as simple as that”.

Heh??? Jesus, what if they didn’t have “a lively imagination”?? It is possible but that is not a study, this is just an assumption. Great work, thanks Einstein.
I had a look on this site, and I found a whole topic about 9/11, and how people that think that US government might have been involved are idiots.
If this is an American website, man THAT is hilarious.

@RA Boesenberg

Have you read “Fingerprints of the Gods?” I have. Not once did Hancock consult any archaeologist, DNA specialist, or historian who would know anything on the matter. Sorry, Hancock did not test drive car either.

Sanji you say:

His ideas about Egypt and the Orion Correlation Theory is so obvious that I don’t understand why they are not taken in count by people that still haven’t manage to solve the mystery themselve.

I smile a big smile and laugh out loud. Just the barest amount of research will indicate that the orion correlation like the 10500 BCE correlation is dubious. (It is from Edgar Cayce for example) Of course the pyramids around Giza do NOT form the constellation orion unless you do a major distortion. Further there were two pharoahs who lived between the builders of the three great pyramids who did NOT build at Giza. Of course did not not remember that Hancock propsed that the pyramids were built to commemorate a date c. 10500 B.C.E. A completly absurd idea. THe number of Egyptologists who give any credence to this idea can be numbered at close to 0. Oh and as for the three pyramids of Giza looking like Oions belt. Well only if Orion’s belt was backwards.

As for

Regarding that Yonagumi structure, I don’t know what you mean by “True believer material”. What I believe is that we have here an underwater structure that has the same base lenght of the Great Pyramid (not completely sure about that), that is aligned North / South, and seems man-made. And last time it was above water was 8 to 12000 years ago, a time where no one on earth could have had the technology or knowledge to do it. I find this fact, on its own, taken apart from any context or theory, is quite amazing, isn’t it?. It is not garanteed that it is man made, but in my opinion this is just a matter of time. Japan’s top marine geologist and many other seems to think that this possibilty is high enough to bet their own career on it. I have seen many pics of it, do you really think that nature did that?? Not impossible, but mathematically, scientifically and logicaly, it seems quite unlikely. The odds speak volume.

Yep you have swallowed truebeliever material by the cartload. I felt like rolling around the floor laughing when I read the above. The overwhelming majority of Geologists who have examined Yonagumi rate it as natural. The fact that you haven’t come across this only indicates your lack of research. So sorry the “site” is natural geology. Yep I’ve seen the pics and it looks natural to me. The fact that you have said the above only tells me you have done research in true believer places.

As for this comment

But what I also see is people picking on details – but flaws -, in a speech fuelled with bad faith, arrogance and bitterness. Then they dismiss the entire caracter, the theory talked about, as well as his other ideas and then brand him an amateur, lunatic, pseudo archeologosist and so on. And this is where I think it’s wrong, even with flaws, his ideas are still quite interesting, still valid enough to be worth further serious studies, and especially the general frame of mind behind it, something that his opponents and established theories do not take in count, at all.

Aww we call a crank a crank and a distorter a distorter. We’re so bad. Sorry but Hancock is a distorter his treatment of both the Maya and Tiwanaku are replente with examples of incredible distortion. His discusion of the Mayan calander is a monument to bad scholarship. The rest of his works are incredible examples of fraud and fakery. The theory is nonsense that does not in the least deserve to be taken seriously. Hancock”s “evidence” non existant. We are talking about a man who took the face on Mars seriously here. Of course no account as per usual is taken of Hancocks view of professional archaeologists as conspirators covering up the truth or his calculated contempt for them.

Thank you again for giving an excellent example of how a true believer forms and of course showing once again deep ignorance.

Look man, I didn’t post here to start a debate about every aspects of Hancock’s work and theory, like I can see everywhere else, or to be branded an ignorant by a smug head who dont know anything about me, what I know or what I do for a living. I came here to see critics about him and once again these critics are rubbish or not enough to make me think hancock is worthless. You can find answers about what you just said on the Giza pyramids OCT and Yonagumi yourself so I wont bother trying to defend these point cos others are doing that already.
“These poeple had a lively imagination, it really is as simple as that”
Bless you.
You people play your role perfectly. Pigeons don’t even know they are pigeons, so I will just let you keep enjoying the smell of your own farts on this little online circus, and keep walking pass the blind and fools.

Sanji, you said:

Look man, I didn’t post here to start a debate about every aspects of Hancock’s work and theory, like I can see everywhere else, or to be branded an ignorant by a smug head who dont know anything about me, what I know or what I do for a living. I came here to see critics about him and once again these critics are rubbish or not enough to make me think hancock is worthless. You can find answers about what you just said on the Giza pyramids OCT and Yonagumi yourself so I wont bother trying to defend these point cos others are doing that already.
“These poeple had a lively imagination, it really is as simple as that”
Bless you.
You people play your role perfectly. Pigeons don’t even know they are pigeons, so I will just let you keep enjoying the smell of your own farts on this little online circus, and keep walking pass the blind and fools.

Oh well You should really not say anything as once again you reveal your deep ignorance and utter unwillingless to learn. Read some basic texts on Egyptology and Archaeology first, which you have so plainly failed to do.

As for being a smug head thats a little rich coming from someone who says:

You people play your role perfectly. Pigeons don’t even know they are pigeons, so I will just let you keep enjoying the smell of your own farts on this little online circus, and keep walking pass the blind and fools.

I’m not going to take seriously being called a pigeon, which
is your way of saying I’ve been sucked into believing stuff that is not true, from someone who quite clearly does not have much knowledge of Archaeology. I suggest that if anyone is the pigeon it is you who has been sucked into swallowing Hancock’s and others dubious crap. If you want to swallow the lies and distortions of people like Hancock please do so. please continue to ignore the vast mountain of evidence that refutes their fantasies.

As for this comment:

You can find answers about what you just said on the Giza pyramids OCT and Yonagumi yourself so I wont bother trying to defend these point cos others are doing that already.

Yep true believers and other fatasists are continuing to distort and lie about those things. THe fact is that the overwhelming majority of geologists reject the idea that Yonagumi is artificial. The vast majority of Egyptologists reject the OCT and the Great Pyramids. The speculations, fantasies and hand waving of the true believers are of little interest to the real experts. I can only suggest that you look at this extensive and massive literature demolishing this crap.

P{lease continue to fantasize yourself has possessed by true knowledge that us, poor deluded “pigeons” who rely on real evidence are excluded from. The evidence is quite overwhelming that Hancock deliberately distorts and is a shoddy scholar. As mentioned before his stuff about the dates of Tiwanaku and the Mayan Calander are quite enough to consign him to the garbage heap.

Of course the critics of Hancock are “rubbish” even though they have found error after error, nonsense after nonsense in Hancock all of which is easily found on the web. AS for being labeled as ignorant by a smug head? Well there is no reason for anyone to label you as ignorant your own comments do that quite well enough. As for not knowing you. Well based on your comments you are indeed phenomenally ignorant of archeaology and much else.

THank you for once again indicating that so many people attracted to alternative nonsense feel that they have special knowledge that the rest of us “pigeons” don’t have. As for farts please continue to enjoy Hancock’s abundant number 2s.

Hey, Sanji, here are two authors to start with if you want to know about real archaeology: Brian Fagan and Ken Feder.

I think the only garbage we can talk about is this stupid article. Whoever wrote it, he only makes statements and talks shit about Graham Hancock because he does not agree with him. He should realise Mr Hancock theories are being serioulsy taken into account by those who dare see things, not in the way we are said at universities by the statuos quo, but what the evidence itsel suggests. He says the olmecs were “imaginative”.
That ’s pathetic. I invite you to debate with ideas and not speak stupidities just because you are envious of Mr. Hancock contributions to unveil the humankind’s past.

Pacal and Sanji are nothing else but stupid apprentices who spit on Hancock’s work just because they are said to do so. A couple of arrogant misers whose only purpose is to convince people that the orthodox ancient history is the owner of complete trutth. How much are you paid? Perhaps you both defend is a crappy job at a faculty full of old biased arecheologists, so bitter that they can not accept the inconsistencies of their “discipline” (I do not call it science, since arqueology is not a science, physics is science, not this shit, chiefly when you see they are afraid of a multidisciplinaty aproach when studying the misteries of the past). You both guys, should be aware that we do not need your fucking point of view to get to grips with questions and conclusions about the ancient past of mankind. Why do not you come back to the shithole you came from?

Think about this, Hancock is more famous tham you could ever dream, because he dared say what you ingnore. History will say who was right, either hancock or a couple of anonym archeology aficionados of this shitty website.

Incognitus if you have any ability to read you should realize that Sanji thinks Hancock is great. I suppose you mean Roland of Gilead. Like Sanji though you display deep transcedent ignorance. Let us look at your bowel movements.

He should realise Mr Hancock theories are being serioulsy taken into account by those who dare see things, not in the way we are said at universities by the statuos quo, but what the evidence itsel suggests.

The fact that Hancock as a few deluded followers who know next to nothing about Archaeology impresses me not at all. As for what the evidence suggests. Mr. Hancock of course as is typical for him ignores the evidence and what it says. The evidence overwhelmingly says that Twanaku is less than 2000 years old, but Hancock ignores it. The evidence does not support Hancock’s prehistoric supercivilization, but in fact refrutes and of course he ignores it.

Pacal and Sanji are nothing else but stupid apprentices who spit on Hancock’s work just because they are said to do so. A couple of arrogant misers whose only purpose is to convince people that the orthodox ancient history is the owner of complete trutth. How much are you paid? Perhaps you both defend is a crappy job at a faculty full of old biased arecheologists, so bitter that they can not accept the inconsistencies of their “discipline” (I do not call it science, since arqueology is not a science, physics is science, not this shit, chiefly when you see they are afraid of a multidisciplinaty aproach when studying the misteries of the past). You both guys, should be aware that we do not need your fucking point of view to get to grips with questions and conclusions about the ancient past of mankind. Why do not you come back to the shithole you came from?

Lets see a complete novice like Hancock, with little real knowledge tries to overthrow the work of thousands of scholars with nothing more than a fantasy of wish fulfillmen t and the defenders of so-called Orthodoxy are arrogant!? Irony of ironies.

Like all good true believers you fantasize that any opponents of your revealed truth are motivated by bias and of course are paid. Well I’m not being paid at all for this, sadly! Also the usual conspiracy psychosis / delusion.

So Archaeology is not a science. Thank you for showing a most deep ignorance. Please read an introductory text to Archaeology. Of course you then label it “shit”. Please explain to me in detail how to do do a dig in the desert versus underwater. How to perform a carbon 14 test. Please explain Paleoethnobiology. How to do a shell midden Analysis? All of which are involved modern Archaeology.

As for being afraid of a multidisplinary approach. Well that is exactly what modern Archaeology involves routinely. Your statement about fear only provides abundant evidence that you are indeed phenomnally ignorant of Archaeology.

Like all true believers when your cherished delusions are attacked you react by screams of hysteria. Sorry but I didn’t come out of a shithole and so won’t ever be going there.

As for thinking about Hancock’s fame. Why should I? I’m glad he as made himself rich off the deludded and guilible, because that is the only way the guilible and credulous will learn. As for daring to say what I ignore. Hancock is merely saying pseudoscientific crap that others have said before, it is nothing new but the same old snake oil. The verdict is already in and was in long before Hancock and it says he is full of it.

OK; Pacal, you want to play hard? Lest do it.
You, Mr. Almighty encarnation of archeology, explain to me a few things and make me wise:

1) Baalbek in Lebanon: How did the ancients cut and moved blocks of 1500 tones? What is the technical method to to this? Why are our modern cranes not able to move them and the ancientswere?

2) How do you date stone using C14?

3) Why the similarities between cultures like the mayans and egiptians, why did both cultures were avid stargazers and built pyramids? Are all of these similarities “just coincidence”?

4) Why does the sphinx have evidence of erosion caused by massive water flow on it? When does the climate record say Egipt had a rainy weather? Robert Schoch put his reputation at stake saying this is the case with the sphinx…was he wrong?

4) Finally, how are we suppose to trust a horde of biased individuals when they can not even offer an open explanation to these dilemas?

5) Give the link to the archeological papers that show your points. If not, I will suposse you are a windbag and nothing more!!!!

Finally, Richard Feymann was very critic of scientific methods in social sciences (which includes archeology, as far as I understand), see and grow intellectually:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IaO69CF5mbY

From the point of view of a phycisist, archeology is just a bunch of innacurate methods whose uncertainty grows the more we go back in time. It is not a natural science. When we are talking about pre-history events, I think archeology is more flawed than ever.

SAnji, sorry for what I said about you, I think I put you side by side with that discusting Pacal, which is already a painful mistake!!!
Really sorry!!!

Incognitus you can read my reply to your nonsense at.
http://makinapacalatxilbalba.blogspot.com/2010/07/hancock-woo-graham-hancock-following-is.html

Hey Pacal,:I have read all your astonishing compilation of books and ad-hominems. It is funny to believe you are very wise because you have wasted your life loving books instead of women, but that is your problem, not mine. You should not reveal your secrets in your website. However, in my view you are a biased ignorant.

1) You supported my point that C!4 method can not date stone. From that point of view, it means dating of organic material is highly dependent on the interpretation of the archeologist.

You quoted:
“The stones were transported over a path only 600 meters length and about 15 meters *downhill*. The quarry is 1160 meters high, and the temple 145 meters. So it was easy to keep the stones on an even level to their final resting place and it was unnecessary to lift them about 7 meters as some authors claim. As you might know, Rome is the city with the most obelisks outside of Egypt. They stole the things by the dozen and took them home. The heaviest known obelisk weighs 510 tons, and it was transported some 1000’s of *kilometers*. This transport was documented by the roman author Marcellinus Comes. The Romans even left detailed paintings and reliefs about the ways to move such things : as on the bottom of the Theodosius-obelisk in Istanbul. They used “Roman-patented” winches, in German called “Göpelwinden” which work with long lever ways. To move a 900 ton stone, they needed only 700 men. The transport was slow, about 30 meters a day, because they had to dismantle and rebuild the winches every few meters, to pull the obelisk with maximum torque. But in Baalbek, where they moved several blocks, maybe they built an alley of winches, where they passed the block from winch to winch.”

My answer to that is SHOW IT. Has this experiment been done with such weights there? Of course not. I see many 2000 tones blocks moved and that fit perfectly in a complex distribution. I know for sure the most powerful cranes can not lift weight heavier than 300 tones. If you were an Engineer, you would understand it is just not a matter of leting them go down the hill, as your very purposely selected quotation says. I will not believe your quotation because it contradicts common sense, my common sense tells me it is not possible to move such kind of blocks

2) You have answered as expected. C14 can not date stones. Why do archeologists dare say with complete certainty the date in wich any monument was built? It is left to the analist criterium, and that is not valid in such matters. There is a degree of uncertainty that is ihnerent to this method and that can not be helped, as simple as that. In the most ancient monuments, the interpretation deduced by archeologists may be flawed or biased to let the evidence fit in the stream of knowledge they accept. What guarantees that the monument and the age of the carbon dated sample are the same? As far as I see it, a monument could be far older than the carbon dated samples and this fact may not be detected by the archeological survey. I find a problem with this, sorry.

You seem to assume you should trust the archeologists and that we should believe they are never biased or whatsoever. If you were a natural scientist you would understand that is not the case. Doesn’t matter. The IPCC is a clear example of how preconceptions can even make you doubt about a “serious research”. If climate scientists are prone to this thing, I believe archeologists as well. So your claim of complete trust to the methods of these people doesn’t work for me.

3) You seem completely unaware of the many similarities between these ancient cultures. Tell me something…have you read Hancock’s work? I bet you have not. He points out the parallels among these cultures with good clarity. He may not be right in everything he claims, but the evidence of something wrong with the accepted archeology explanation is vast, in my view we have a case here. In Physics, if you have an anomaly in a theory that does not fit it makes your theory crumble. Why is not this the case in archeology? You say they are “scientists”.
You tell me “that human civilizations have similarities because they are human civilizations”, a poor explanation for someone who boast his intelligence for reading dusty second-hand books in a library. If you were archeologist unless… what it shows is that you are not aware of such similarities, therefore you should undertake your own investigation in the matter.

4) Do you contradict Robert Schoch? His evidence comes from geology, a natural science, certainly more robust and accurate that this “science” called archeology. So I have to believe you instead of DR. Schoch, which is a leading scholar in his field? You must be kidding!!! Of course his arguments are disputed by ignorants in geological aspects, which find it easy to give support to their preconceived ideas on the Sphinx.

5) I am not paying you, that is true. I would pay quality job, not your second-hand research. If you say you are right, you have to show it. If you do not want to be asked, you do not get into this forum.
I will not recommend you so many books, as I would not like to end up like you. Please take a look a the archeological inconsistencies that DR. Cremo points out in the following book:
http://www.amazon.com/Forbidden-Archeology-Hidden-History-Human/dp/0892132949

He has a PhD and he does not find what I have told you coming from “an ignorant”. I do not care what you may think, what you think is your problem. But you should be aware that people have the right to question even the academia when searching for answers. People like you can only see and believe what they have been said by a system who wants you to believe what is useful to them. You should make an effort for not sticking your head in the sand and try to open your mind at these inconsistencies, and start to question. But it may be late for you, as far as I see.

You are right, I may not take time to read your books. I live in paradise, not in that shitty land called Canada, full of snow and with freezing temperatures most of the year. Specimens like you are rare here, since we are not obliged to spend our lifes secluded at home or in libraries for not having something interesting to do.

Pakal, I would like to make public how you try to misinform us. You quote about the Theodosius Obelisk, which weighs 400 tones.
See the following link:

http://www.flickr.com/photos/brswanson/2809124885/

THis obeliks was cut into three or two pieces to make possible its transportation. It was originaly 30m tall when in Egipt, but for some technical problem it is now 19m tall. Very interesting. You dare put this obeliks of 400 tones which had to be cut to be moved as comparable to the baalbek blocks. Do you really think people are stupid?

This is another example of people whose knowledge is based how spending their lives reading academic books (real aficionados) but not based on commoon sense.

Sorry, the more you read your arguments, the more I am convinced you do not know what you are talking about.

Icognitus Just as I expected a flood of ad-hominoms that are meaningless and even more powerful indications that you are a true believer and deeply ignorant. Thank you for your concern about my personal life and why are you dragging that in all?

Regarding Carbon 14 dating. Not the slightest bit interested in learning how it works it seems. Again the question of does carbon 14 date rocks is a red herring and is meaningless. No one expects it to date rocks at all. Then again if it did the dates would be in millions of years n’est pas?

But then your further comments indicate that you have absolutely no willingness to find out how carbon 14 is done. As for errors of course they happen and that is why Carbon 14 has all sorts of protocals etc., to minimizes errors. Of course error happen but why should that be a surprise which is why more than one date should be done.

As for your “common sense” regarding Baalbek. If the Romans could move 3 blocks weighing over 100 tons each from Egypt to Constaninople (Istambul) than they could move 1000 tons 1000 yards or less. I note you don’t deal with the evidence found in digs at Baalbek that date the monument to Roman times. As for a crane well I would think we could move a thousand ton block if we wanted to do so. And in fact concrete oil drilling platforms weighing more are moved all the time. As for the crane. So what. The Romans and Egyptians had ropes, pulleys and enourmous work forces. Oh and by the way ancient methods of moving rocks are tested all the time and they work. The only difference between moving a big block and a small block is the labour, time involved the techniques were the same. “Common sense” dictates that this methods were the same only larger. Oh and if Archimedes could design a gaget to lift a ship out of the water the Romans could devise a technique to move 1000 tons 100 yards or less. If the Romans could build 100 miles of Road and 100 miles of aquduct, both more difficult than Baalbek, than they could build Baalbek. Oh and please show that the Romans could not have moved a thousand ton block less than 1000 yards.

As for similarities you just don’t get it. Similarities don’t prove contact they just are similarities. For smoeone who is convinced that Archaeology isn’t like Physics, you seem to want it to be so.

Do you honestly feel that the fact we are human would not lead to cultural similarities without contact? Also you forget the similarities are in many cases vague. After all Mayan and Egyptian pyramids are not very similar. Oh and did you know that pyramids in Peru pre-date Egyptian? The fact is their as been virtually no evidence of old world artifacts in pre-columbian america. Which would be the case if there was contact. Oh and i’ve read Hancock’s Fingerprints of the Gods and several others.

As for Robert Schoch. Obviously you haven’t read or read very badly the stuff I linked too. Do you forget that Geologists have disputed him. Well if it upsets your preconcieved views continue to ignore that fact.

You complain about my second hand research. Well it is obvious you have done no research yourself and thank you for indicating that you have little to no willingness to do reseach yourself.

As for Cremo. Read his book. It was a incredibly funny read. The guy is guilible. Yep he has a Phd and is a creationist and a Vedic scholar. He is another true believer like Hancock. Who now goes around saying the world may end in 2012.

It is you who has stuck his head in the sand and thank you for telling me that you probably won’t read the books I suggested. I guess you don’t want your “truth” questioned. As for thinking people are stupid, well you don’t think the Romans could move those blocks etc. I don’t think your stupid, but you are as this posting shows deeply ignorant and utterly unwilling to remedy that.

As for the personal comments and the insulting reference to my country all it proves is that you are acting 5 years old.

“Plenty of other Olmec statues look as if they depict people from other parts of the world because these Native American craftsmen had lively imaginations. It really is as simple as that.”
LooooooooooL
Man I haven’t laughed so much this week. Thank you, your arrogant ignorance has just made my day.
Keep writing.

I told myself I wouldn’t bother looking again at this crappy page where two individuals think they know about things just because they ve read books that everyone agreed to keep as non questionable truths and facts. Well I just had a look to see how things are going on this lost web page.
Sorry guys, Hancock and others outsmarted you, “experts” and everyone else, it is really as simple as that. They made fools of everyone else. Though they just observed things with a open mind free from academic protocols and took notes.
Experts are so old, bitter and up they re own arse that they will never reconsider or debate. Well its always been like this anyway. Nothing new really. Rinse. Repeat. Here you go, you just got 2000 years of History.
You people play the role of the bunch of cultivated guys who just will never get it. And its fine, this your role, this is what you are. You will always sit on it, blinded and fooled by your own knowledge, and the arrogance that comes out of it.
Yonagumi….off course most experts all agree to say it s natural. They all know (and this applies to other disciplines and about other subjects) what’s gonna happen to their career if they dont jump on the train. I m not interested in experts who think its natural..well exceptionnally impressive and rare to be more accurate. I m interested in experts who think it s man made. And so should you.
And this applies to Giza, south american sites and more.
Anyway, this situation where everyone tries to convince others that they are in the wrong is pointless.
Someone is right, and someone is wrong. And whether you like it or not, I think hancock is the closest to being right, that’s it. End of the story.
Dunno if you guys will watch it, I hope you will, but I found this quite interesting, two lectures from Hancock and Bauval

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DDDlHSjkz0g
and
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZA9JysD5ASk&feature=channel

The second one from Bauval is particulary interesting. If you do watch it, please let me know what you think. It is not too long and I would like to know what you both think of it. Yes they are a few little inconsistencies in what they say, even me noticed it, but it is still awesome. Though I expect you to say something about it being hilarious and showing deep ignorance and bla bla.

If you have something you would like to show me that supports your ideas, I will definitely watch it, so please dont hesitate to share.
Easy boyzz, speak soon.

Hey, Incognitus…

To answer your first question, I make $11.95 an hour working forty hours a week at Smithfield Luter pulling hogs. I wonder where my check from these so called cabal of archaeologist is at. I’m also 28, which I did not think made me old.

Now, here comes the beatdown. Hancock, (I have read Fingerprints of the Gods and actually am ashamed of the fact that I believed it at one point) provides no evidence that those heads are african in origin except that they look african. Well shiver me timbers, they must have been football players too because they’re wearing football helmets. Not really, but just to point out how stupid it is to make an assumption based on looks. This is what Hancock does, and he is wrong.

Your next question about some stones in Lebennon, the space shuttle weighs 2010 tons. Yet, somehow NASA has the ability to not only move this thing over to a launch pad over a mile from its dock, but also put it in orbit. And here’s the kicker, they do it without a crane. Hmmm, but your common sense would tell me this it not possible. You want to know how the stones were moved, probably by using cutting tools (these people had bronze and iron), and they probably moved them by putting them on wooden rollers. It’s that simple. …Or do you think they used some alien technology but did not leave any behind. Pacal answered this question for you, my suggestion is to stop insulting him.

Now on to C14 Radiometric Carbon Dating. Yes, C14 cannot date rock, but that is a strawman anyway. Archaeologist do not date rock and they do not use C14 all that much because they have to establish provenience. Dating the rock that a building is made out of only dates the rock and when it was created, it does not tell when the rock was first cut out of the ground and used as building material. The actual date of the rock is useless information to an archaeologist.

Also, there are ways to date rock, here are a few:
Uranium-Lead Dating
Uranium-Thorium Dating
Rubidium-Strontium Dating
[/pedantic]

Now, for the Maya/Egyptian connection. There was none. The pyramids in Egypt are true pyramids were as the pyramids in Mexico are not true pyramids. They are modified mounds with temples on top to symbolized a temple on a hill or horizon. The writing, artwork, and technology of the Mayans are very different from the Egyptians. Not to mention the time frame does not match up either. The Egyptian Kingdom went from Approx. 3500 BC to 750 BC when they became part of some other empire in history. The Maya City States went from 200BC to 1200 AD. There is a 550 year difference between the two. The only real similarity is the stargazing, but every human culture in history did that. It’s easy to find out things about the heavens when you don’t have TVs, Radios, and Videogames.

As for the Sphinx, Pacal answered this question perfectly. I will like to add that limestone and sandstone both are brittle rock. You can break it off in you hands and rub it into powder. It is very grainy and is easily broken. This has been demonstrated by archaeologists in both the Southwest and Egypt. I’ve actually held sandstone and I know from personal experiance how brittle it is. Brittle rock weathers easily.

BTW, Robert Shloch also said the movie Zeitgeist was acurate and true when it is neither. He has no credibility as a scientist as far as I’m concerned.

Now, I’m not going to do your research for you. You are making the claims, you back them up. Everything I have posted can be backed up just by looking on Wikipedia and Pacal has list of sources as well. I have neither the time nor the patiance and if you want me to prove you wrong, I’m not going to do it. You can look at the facts for what they are. If you don’t want to accept them for what they are, that’s your problem, not mine. Just be prepared when you wind up on the wrong side of history.

Hey Sanji. I do not care what you believe, and I am not here to convince you about Hancock? work. In fact, he may have made mistakes as well, as much as the archeologists are spreading lies about human’s past. It is up to do your own research. What I said Pakal is MY opinion, this is a debate forum, so read, say your opinion and support your arguments, that is all you have to do, no sensible person would claim complete credibility, as long as this person is humble enough to accept his own ignorance (except Pakal of course). I do not care whether you belive it or not, so do not worry and be happy!!!! I also believe all the crap you have just written.

I am beginning to suspect Rolando Gilead and Pakal are the same guy. In any case, Rolando, keep your bloody research for yourself, I am capable enough of doing mine. I have presented my arguments. Look at what you said:

“Your next question about some stones in Lebennon, the space shuttle weighs 2010 tons. Yet, somehow NASA has the ability to not only move this thing over to a launch pad over a mile from its dock, but also put it in orbit. And here’s the kicker, they do it without a crane. Hmmm, but your common sense would tell me this it not possible. You want to know how the stones were moved, probably by using cutting tools (these people had bronze and iron), and they probably moved them by putting them on wooden rollers. It’s that simple. …Or do you think they used some alien technology but did not leave any behind. Pacal answered this question for you, my suggestion is to stop insulting him.”

You are quite a real fool if you think this argument explains the Baalbek anomaly. Are you suggesting the ancients count on similar technology to lift those masive blocks? If that is the case, you are giving the kiss of death to your own argument.

If this is not what you meant, then you are giving the ancients credit for leifting a weight that can only be lifted by the modern NASA spaceship infrastructure, which undermines your arguments against the fact that the ancients used a diffierent technology. I challenge you to describe here how you move a 2000 tone block using ropes and timber logs, how you achive the uncanny precision in order to make these blocks fit perfectly.
I would like to read the nonsese you will come up with.

With your argument, you are just saying that such blocks can only be lifting with modern technology, so thans for supporting what I said.

Reality is so simple, but so difficult to understand for some people, that they tend to give poorly supported explanations for things that are completely obvious if you apply common sense.

Sanji, sorry mate, I have misinterpreted your words again, sorry for my rude tone. I amply agree with you.

I am beginning to suspect Rolando Gilead and Pakal are the same guy. In any case, Rolando, keep your bloody research for yourself, I am capable enough of doing mine. I have presented my arguments. Look at what you said:

Wow, you have no reading comprehension skills. You can’t even get my nick right. BTW, when are you going to complain about my argument, why don’t you provide some evidence to back up yours. Pakal provided sourced material, so why don’t you stop insulting our intellegence here.

You are quite a real fool if you think this argument explains the Baalbek anomaly. Are you suggesting the ancients count on similar technology to lift those masive blocks? If that is the case, you are giving the kiss of death to your own argument.

It’s time for you to either put up of shut up. If the ancients could not have built these megaliths using their own technology, then what technology did they use? If they didn’t build them, then who did? Aliens? Atlanteans? Some white Anglo-Saxon God?

The concept of lifting heavy objects is something so simple, that a child could understand it. If you truly knew what the hell you are talking about, you would understand that the concepts of pulleys and levers are farely simple concepts to understand and they would have been availible to the ancients. When you add enough elbow grease, you can move anything. Also, there is carpentry and masonry techniques that were developed then that are still in use today, because they are so simple and they work. You have provided absolutely no evidence to counter this except that no modern crane can lift those heavy blocks, which does not impress me any. Hell, my example of not having to have a crane to lift heavy objects went right over your head. So, that proves to me you don’t know what you are talking about.

Sorry, Incognitus, you fail.

As an actual Archaeologist i can atest to many an artifact being swept under the carpet by the academic establishment when it deos not fit the reigning paradigm. Examples abound. You do not need to be credentialed to have a fully rounded perspective on any subject, just an interest and an ability to think critically. The willingness to blindly accept information from so-called experts displayed on this forum is a measure of the sucess of the indoctrination system that is erroneously tremed education

ooops, mispelling ot termed in last sentence. before all you pedants jump down my throat.

So, Ragnarok, how may tertiary flakes did you see swept under the cover?

Hi guys, I m still waiting to see what you think of the two links I posted above, both leading to a conference that Hancock and Beauval had a while back. The subjects of them isn’t really about the Olmec mystery, though it is mentionned too.
I ask this because this page isn’t about the olmec. This page is about Hancock being a worthless ignorant who’s name should disappear in History before his evil lies and distortions get more attention, or a smart guy who had the balls to bring something new on the table, when the greatest minds of History have failed to explain an abondant amount of mysteries and inconsistencies about our past, our history and legacy. If you cant even agree about these amazing abnormalities and the questions they implicates then there s no point talking at all.

So here you go, I m not a full on fan of hancock, I m ready to think he is wrong and a liar ect ect if anyone can show it without acting like a little arrogant child not ready yet to reconsider the validity of his knowledge without leaving his pride aside.
And as far as I know, there s no reason to assume that the olmecs depicted accurately people from across the sea “just because they had a lively imagination”. Really? The lack of real foundations based on research and reason behing such statement is baffling, so you better show off some thinking and study of your subject if you attack a person like hancock, boy. I ve been looking out for critcics about him for a while now and this is as far as it gets; low level statements from frustrated little kids full of themselves.
So, please watch those videos if you wanna talk, and go over every point which you think is absurdity. Then show me something solid that proves it. Simple. Oh and please, avoid stuff like “The OCT theory cannot work because you have to put the map upside down”, you gotta be really stupid or blind to brush aside such amazing possibilty and the many other reasons to think so, just because it doesnt fit the current way of thinking about maps in the 21th century, because if you wanna recreate the sky the way you see it from the ground you dont need to invert anything. I couldnt find any real, solid critics about Hancock, so you guys can hopefully show me some good stuff?

Watch these videos, then come back and show some good critics, we ll see what happens.

Shibeee

sanji i to came to this site for exactly the same reasons has u and come to the same conclusion .watched both videos thanks for that .my first introduction to bauval who i think is both intelligent and honest man listening to him now on information machine try watching black genesis by bauval and dont waste your time arguing with pacal think him rude and offensive and blind to exploration of facts

Yeh it s probably pointless to discuss with those guys, because in the end I m just gonna repeat what hancock and others have already said, and I m gonna read here the same critics Ive seen, which sometimes are legitimate, but never good, solid, proven, unbreakable reasons to completely dismiss hancock and every single aspect of his work. In the end, what he says has been going on for a quite a while through history, it s not brand new, so that debate has already been going on for ages.
Maybe because people like me haven’t yet spend a massive amount of time reading work to boost their knowledge, intelligence and ego, that what might be actually misleading or wrong, it s easier to get on with the “outside the box” way of thinking.
I wont go into details because they all say it better than me, but his position about C14 dating process for ancient monuments, his position about the Ice Age and its many mysteries, about maps found around the globe showing what might be locations unknown at the time, about ancient monuments that seem to have atronomical aspects to it, about underwater structures looking suspicious, about drawings, texts, interpretation of some ancient texts. and so on and so on….
There is just so much that you cant just ignore all of this, even when “it’s not a prefect match”, “most specialists disagree “, “he isnt a professional” and blah blah blah blah.
There are obviously a lot yet to discover about ourselves and our past, and that dude and his mates definitely bring something worth looking into. If a lot of experts of our time are against even debating or considering all this with a new eye, then so be it. It happened countless times before. Doesnt mean we should blindly believe people like him, but if you sit on your books and ignore such caracter, then you really have shit in your eyes and your ears, and your slowing down the learning process of mankind. Anyway, I m wasting my time typing all this, lets agree to disagree.
Guys I m still waiting to hear your opinion about those two videos

Kevin you say:

sanji i to came to this site for exactly the same reasons has u and come to the same conclusion .watched both videos thanks for that .my first introduction to bauval who i think is both intelligent and honest man listening to him now on information machine try watching black genesis by bauval and dont waste your time arguing with pacal think him rude and offensive and blind to exploration of facts.

Bauval is not worth taking the slightest bit seriously along with Hancock. The whole Orion correlation thing as been exploded long ago. You are not aware that the consilation of Orion when imposed on Pyramids at Giza and the Neighbouting area don’t match up. But then Bauval’s a joke. Have you bothered to read up on why the majority of Geologists do not accept a early date for the Sphinx as suggested by Schoch? Or how about how Bauval and Hancock were gunning for a 10500 B.C.E., date for ther Sphinx and basically ignoring that even Schoch gave a date after 8000 B,C.E. Of course do you accept the idea that the great pyramid was planned in 10500 B.C.E., although built thousands of years later to reflect the date of 10500 B.C.E. Which by the way Hancock got from Edgar Cayce, (the sleeping prophet). Both of them have been in the past quite ready to accuse Egyptologists of lying, of fraud, fabrication and forgery. In Fingerprints of the Gods Hancock accused an 19th century Egyptologist of fabricating Khufu’s name on stone blocks found in the chambers above the Kings chamber. Hancock has since retracted this baseless accusation but he continues to blither on about wicked Archeologists supressing the truth.

As for your last comment given the quite vicious names I’v e been called here I find you thinking me rude / offensive hilarious. I’ve merely said you guys were ignorant and clueless. Which you most evidently are. As for blind to exploration of the facts. Depends. If you mean the made up nonsense of Hancock and Bauval; that is speculation and fantasy not fact. But then you guys seem to have absolutely no interest in doing any sort of real research at all, but just mouth whatever Bauval and Hancock pull out of their asses.

Sanji you say:

Yeh it s probably pointless to discuss with those guys, because in the end I m just gonna repeat what hancock and others have already said, and I m gonna read here the same critics Ive seen, which sometimes are legitimate, but never good, solid, proven, unbreakable reasons to completely dismiss hancock and every single aspect of his work. In the end, what he says has been going on for a quite a while through history, it s not brand new, so that debate has already been going on for ages.

Yep the debate between the cranks and wackjobs as been going on for ages. Almost all of it in the minds of the cranks. Thank you for indicating that you have no desire to do any real research.

As for your request for unbreakable reason to dismiss Hancock. What about the simple fact that his lost super civilization seems to have vanished without a trace. How about the fact that each and everyone of the anomolies he points to is almost always asa a “prosaic” explaination. How about Hancocks conspiracy mongering. I should not forget to note Hancock’s 2012 boosterism.

From Baalbak, (built in Roman times), to the Piri Re’is map Hancock recycles mysteries that are not mysteries.

Maybe because people like me haven’t yet spend a massive amount of time reading work to boost their knowledge, intelligence and ego, that what might be actually misleading or wrong, it s easier to get on with the “outside the box” way of thinking.

Yep musn’t have ones head clogged with knowledge it might inhibit’s one ability to swallow woo. I guess ignorance is a blessed state and knowing nothing is cool. Oh and Hancock doesn’t think outside the box his thought is firmly in the area of twentieth century crank Archaeology, he is right up their with Von Daniken, and esspecially Robert Charroux, (One Hundred Thousand Years of Man’s Unknown History).

I wont go into details because they all say it better than me, but his position about C14 dating process for ancient monuments, his position about the Ice Age and its many mysteries, about maps found around the globe showing what might be locations unknown at the time, about ancient monuments that seem to have atronomical aspects to it, about underwater structures looking suspicious, about drawings, texts, interpretation of some ancient texts. and so on and so on….
There is just so much that you cant just ignore all of this, even when “it’s not a prefect match”, “most specialists disagree “, “he isnt a professional” and blah blah blah blah.

Hancock’s position about Carbon 14 and how it is used to date monuments is deeply ignorant. Hancock never seems to get the fact that the materials that are associated with the momuments are dated. But then how Archaeologists do that would require him to read some of the many texts about Carbon 14 dating and how to use it. For dating methods see Archaeology, Second Edition, Renfrew, Colin, THames and Hudson, London, 1996.

He could also use with reading a book about climate history. Say Climate Change in Prehistory, Burroughs, William J., Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 2005.

And of course has mentioned above Hancock’s “mysteries” are almost always not mysteries at all.

It is quite easy to ignore most of it, because it is generally not a mystery, and what little is “mysterious” does not require a unknown super civilization or aliens. I should mention here that foe a time Hancock supported the idea of alien monuments on Mars, he as backed away from that I hope.

I lost any respect for Hancock from reading the sections of <Fingerprints of the Gods (A deliberate play on Von Daniken’s Chariots of the Gods, in my opinion.), from his shoddy chapters on the Maya and Tiwanaku. In th Tiwanaku chapter he almost entirely, (except for a throw away line) ignores the conventional date of the site and instead advances a far out date based on astronomical alighments deduced from recently reconstructed buildings. These dates contradict dozens of Carbon 14 results along with ceramic, and stratigraphy studies to say nothing of ethno-historical data all of which date the site 200-1000 C.E (A.D.). Please see Ancient Tiwanku, Janusek, John Wayne, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 2008, The Tiwanaku, Kolata, Alan L., Blackwell, Oxford, 1993.

As for the Maya please see The Ancient Maya, Sixth Edition, Sharer, Robert J, & Traxler, Loa P, Stanford University Press, Stanford CA, 2006, pp. 102-120, for the Mayan calander. It also shows why Hancock’s discussion of it is a crock. Hancock’s discussion of the Sarcophagus lid in the tomb of Pacal at Palenque is also totally bogus.

There are obviously a lot yet to discover about ourselves and our past, and that dude and his mates definitely bring something worth looking into. If a lot of experts of our time are against even debating or considering all this with a new eye, then so be it. It happened countless times before. Doesnt mean we should blindly believe people like him, but if you sit on your books and ignore such caracter, then you really have shit in your eyes and your ears, and your slowing down the learning process of mankind. Anyway, I m wasting my time typing all this, lets agree to disagree.
Guys I m still waiting to hear your opinion about those two videos

Thank you for the Galileo gambit, the typical cliche of cranks everywhere. However for every Galileo who was right there were 10,000 cranks who were way wrong.

As for seeing it with a new eye? Nope! Its the same old same old processed woo. In the 19th century Ignatius Donnelly was touting woo in his Atlantis: The Antediluvian World, in the early twethieth century we had Edgar Cayce and in the late 60’s and into the 70’s we had Von Daniken, along with countless others. It is the same old crap served for another generation.

As for shit in eyes and ears. Since people like Hancock listen to other woo miesters and ignire reams and reams of data while continuing their diet of woo. It is clear who has shit in their eyes and ears and it is Hancock and those who believe like him.

Although it is nice to know that you think the hard won knowledge of the past won over the past century or so is shit.

Some more reading:

Invented Knowledge, Fritze, Ronald, H, Reaktion Books, London, 2009.

Ancient Astraunauts, Cosmic Collisions and other Popular THeories about Man’s Past, Stiebing, William H, Prometheus Books, Buffalo NY, 1984.

Giza: The Truth, Lawton, Ian & Ogilvie-Herald, Chris, Invisible Cities Press, Montpelier Vermont, 2001.

P.S. The two links are to films that are merely the same dull old nostrums that have been coming from those two for quite sometime.

Sanji as an example of Hancock’s problem “common sense” is a comment he makes that Khufu’s hieroglyph being found on stone blocks inside the great pyramid is meaningless, and further that they were possibly forged. The quality of Hancock’s scholarship is clear from that comment.

First Hancock fudges were the marks were found and ignores that they were quarry marks not just marks. In otherwords blocks marked for transportation to a building site. Also the blocks with the quarry mark were found in a chamber above the Kings Chamber in the great pyramid that had been sealed from the building of the Great Pyramid until the 19th century. Hancock manages to nicely fudge that it must mean, most likely, that the pyramid was built for a King named Khufu.

Hancock’s dismissal of the “marks” a a possible forgery by the Egyptologist / explorer Vyse. This is nonsense. Oh and it now appears that the quarry “marks” contine round the corners into the crevacies between blocks. So much for forgery.

Of course Hancock gets the idea that the marks may be forgeries from author Zecharia Sitchin in his book Stairway to Heaven.

An excellent source for info on this is pp. 95-113, of Giza The Truth, by Ian Lawton and Chris Ogilvie-Hera;d, Invisible Cities Press, Montpelier VT, 2001. The above book is of especial interest in that the authors are very sympathetic to “alternative” history and archaeology. The same book is excellent on the date of the Great Pyramid, accepting the traditional date of Khufu’s reign c. 2600 B.C.E. I could of course mention carbon 14 dating results. Hancock also ignores the very clear line of development of pyramid construction from Djoser’s Step Pyramid to the Great Pyramid. Hancock leaves out the Red Pyramid, the Bent Pyramid, the Pyramid of Medium and a couple of pyramids which were started and not completed. Which shows a definite development of technique. For more Read The Pyramids of egypt, by I.E.S. Edwards, Penguin Books, London, 1970, and multiple further editions.

The same dissesction can be performed on comment after comment Hancock makes.

I m making a cool post, will take a bit of time because I m not english and I want it to be comprehensible. So please keep an eye on this page.
Ive just read all the comments on this page, and somehow if you step back from it, arguments for and against hancock (and those type of ideas) all make sense at some point. I want to debate a bit more with you guys, because it will help me to get a better opinion. But clearly, there are A LOT of really,really, really odd things about the ancient world. This fact on its own should make all of us accept that there is definitely something strange about our past history, because otherwise pages and discussions like the ones presented here wouldn’t exist, or need to. Quite brilliant, I find this very exciting.
Will be back asap.

Damn my computer doesn’t work anymore! Humm I m going back home for Christmas so I ll do it from there, I ll post within the next 2/3 weeks.
Btw I posted the above after a heavy night, what I meant to say is that I wanna present a few odd things to you guys and see what you think.
Speak soon.

I thought I should read the infamous FOG before I post anything else, so I m doing that. I m halfway through it now, will be done in, lets say, one month or so.
Easy guys, speak soon

Any novice can look at those stone heads and see that they are Amerindian. I was once fooled into believing the supposed “Negroid” features until I saw pictures of Natives from the region that resembled those stone heads. People who say the giant heads look Negroid have flawed racialist views. This is simply 15th – 19th Century perceptions of race. This poses a problem for Hancock and the Afrocentrics, because all of these claims stem from the “opinion” of an alleged African phenotype.

It’s great that there are experts in the field but we can argue this without them. Not saying we don’t need them, just saying that if Afrocentrics and the Hancocks of the world can invent junk history then we can debunk them easily because they only have opinion.

The Olmecs were Amerindian. There is no mystery to who they were and there is no proof of any African influence.

Fallacious argument is fallacious. Ever heard of the mitochondrial Eve? Keep calling leading researchers “cult-archaeologists” and “afro-centric racists” if that’s all you can muster as proof that they are wrong. Please don’t use facts or do research for yourself, just keep labeling people you don’t agree with.

bohemianexile you say:

Fallacious argument is fallacious. Ever heard of the mitochondrial Eve? Keep calling leading researchers “cult-archaeologists” and “afro-centric racists” if that’s all you can muster as proof that they are wrong. Please don’t use facts or do research for yourself, just keep labeling people you don’t agree with.

What does Mitochondrial Eve have to do with the fact that Olmec statutes look like modern day Amerindian natives of the area? There is NO need to postulate that the statutes are depictions of Africans. There is also no evidence Archaeologically of an African presence in Olmec culture / society. Calling Hancock and other pseudo-scientists researchers is of course hilarious. Just look at the bibliographies of their books, full of references to all the familiar tropes and crap of yes “cult” and “pseudo-scientist” cant. As for proof they are wrong it exists in abundance. Everytthing from genetic studies to archaeology shows they are wrong.

It is a fallacious arguement to assume, and it is an assumption, that because the statutes “look like” African they are Africans esspecially since there are people in the area today, Amerindians, who look like the statutes. Calling people like Hancock “researchers” is in my opinion deeply insulting to those real researchers who work in the field. Perhaps you should read some of their work. May I recomend the following.

Olmec Archaeology and Early Mesoamerica, Christopher A. Pool, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 2007.
The Olmecs, Richard A. Diehl, Thames and Hudson, London, 2004.
The Ancient Kingdoms of Mexico, Nigel Davies, Penguin Books, London, 1982.
Mesoamerica Goes Public: Early Ceremonial Centers, Leaders and Communities, in Mesoamerican Archaeology, Ed. Julia A. Hendon & Rosemary A. Joyce, Blackwell Pub. Oxford, 2004, pp. 43-72.
Mexico: From the Olmecs to the Aztecs, 6th Edition, Michael D. Coe & Rex Koontz, Thames and Hudson, London, 2008, pp. 39-100.
First Peoples in a New World, David J. Meltzer, University of California Press, Berkeley CA, 2009, pp. 184-207.
Art, Ritual, and Rulership in the Olmec World, F. Kent Reilly, in The Ancient Civilizations of Mesoamerica, Ed. Michael E. Smith & Marilyn A. Masson, Blackwell Pub., Oxford, 2000.
CA Forum on Anthropology: Robbing Native American Cultures: Van Sertima’s Afrocentricity and the Olmecs, Gabriel Haslip-Viera & Bernard Ortiz de Montellano, & Warren Barbour, in Current Anthropology, v. 38, No. 3, Jun. 1997, pp. 419-441.
The Spanish Entrada: A Model for Assessing Claims of Pre-Columbian between the Old and New World, Kenneth L. Feder, in North American Archaeologist, v. 15, No. 2, Ed. Roger W. Moeller, Baywood Pub. Co. Inc., Amityville NY, 1994, pp. 147-166.

Opps! Kent Reilly’s article is on pp. 369-399 of The Ancient Civilizations of Mesoamerica.

‘Bishop’ Williamson is a thoroughly unpleasant man with some rancid beliefs. But then the SSPX are a nasty bunch all round:

http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2009/feb/19/richard-williamson-lefebvre

I think Henryk Broder’s reaction to this is the best I’ve seen and it’s a shame it should be limited to readers of German, so here’s my translation of the relevant brief extract:

“… Richard Williamson believes that God created the world in six days, that humans are descended from Adam and Eve, he believes in the Immaculate Conception and in the Virgin Birth, the Assumption and the Resurrection of Jesus – the only thing he doesn’t want to believe is that the Holocaust took place.”

Argentina has ordered him to leave the country or be expelled: http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/americas/7900591.stm

http://www.nafcash.com

Norman, that’s a total crock.

Treblinka was destroyed once Operation Reinhard had concluded. By maintaining that the soil hasn’t been disturbed, Krege implies that the camp itself didn’t exist either, which is frankly beyond stupid.

‘frankly beyond stupid’.

Which seems to sum up our ‘friend’ Mr Bates (who also links to Stormfront) nicely. Maybe he keeps his mother’s body in a cupboard as well.

The Bishop’s definition of ‘reviewing evidence’ seems to involve teaming up with the likes of David Irving and Michelle Renouf:

http://www.hurryupharry.org/2009/02/25/13327/

The latest is that Williamson has ‘apologised’ for his comments, without retracting anything. Benedict, to his credit, despite his recent naivety in the matter, has said that this is not good enough. He has also apologised himself for his mistakes in dealing with the matter. He has not however said he will not reimpose the excommunication if satisfaction is not forthcoming. Fair enough, as the excommunication and Williamson’s rabid pronouncements had nothing to do with each other in the beginning. Fellay has dropped Williamson like a hot potato, an act of self-serving hypocrisy, as Williamson has only publicisized views held by many, if not most, members of the SSPX. It is fairly obvious that Fellay wants to avoid being tainted with the same brush. As Williamson himself said, he is Jonah being jettisoned to appease the storm. One wonder sif Williamson reflects that he is suffering the opprobrium he has heaped on others so many times. With intimate knowledge of the SSPX and Williamson, I cannot see that the one will be reconciled with the other.

“As Williamson himself said, he is Jonah being jettisoned to appease the storm.”

Williamson needs to reread The Book of Jonah. Jonah willingly throws himself into the sea after a drawing of lots identifies him as having brought about God’s anger. He decides that if he has caused divine anger that others should not suffer. He is not “jettisoned.”

A little self-aggrandizement.

Indeed.

Prove Willaimson WRONG by proving that the gas chambers actually existed as murder weapons…otherwise, shut your stupid yaps.

Ah, the gentle voice of reason. Well, gentlemen, you heard what the intelligent man said.

We goyim are awakening to the fabrication of history.

Every statement made by Bishop Williamson in his interview is carefully and scientifically refuted in my paper entitled:
“TECHNICAL AND HISTORICAL RESPONSES TO STATEMENTS MADE BY BISHOP RICHARD WILLIAMSON CONCERNING THE HOLOCAUST.” This paper can be read on line at:

http://www.holocaust-history.org/williamson/williamson.shtml

Harry W. Mazal OBE

It seems Williamson is to stand trial in Germany. The court has urged him to be present in person. The trial may begin in February of March 2010.

To William Henderson, Harry Mazal and and all those who use their intellect and humanity to uncover, examine and sustain the truth, a very heartfelt thank you. I hesitate to say this but while it may seem like forensic science but it is also an act of love and necessary work from which we all benefit.

This can be my 2nd see to this weblog. We are starting up a new initiative while in the exact same category as this blog. Your blog site supplied us with essential information and facts to give good results on. You’ve gotten finished a marvellous employment.

‘Bishop’ Williamson is a thoroughly unpleasant man with some rancid beliefs. But then the SSPX are a nasty bunch all round:

http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2009/feb/19/richard-williamson-lefebvre

I think Henryk Broder’s reaction to this is the best I’ve seen and it’s a shame it should be limited to readers of German, so here’s my translation of the relevant brief extract:

“… Richard Williamson believes that God created the world in six days, that humans are descended from Adam and Eve, he believes in the Immaculate Conception and in the Virgin Birth, the Assumption and the Resurrection of Jesus – the only thing he doesn’t want to believe is that the Holocaust took place.”

Argentina has ordered him to leave the country or be expelled: http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/americas/7900591.stm

http://www.nafcash.com

Norman, that’s a total crock.

Treblinka was destroyed once Operation Reinhard had concluded. By maintaining that the soil hasn’t been disturbed, Krege implies that the camp itself didn’t exist either, which is frankly beyond stupid.

‘frankly beyond stupid’.

Which seems to sum up our ‘friend’ Mr Bates (who also links to Stormfront) nicely. Maybe he keeps his mother’s body in a cupboard as well.

The Bishop’s definition of ‘reviewing evidence’ seems to involve teaming up with the likes of David Irving and Michelle Renouf:

http://www.hurryupharry.org/2009/02/25/13327/

The latest is that Williamson has ‘apologised’ for his comments, without retracting anything. Benedict, to his credit, despite his recent naivety in the matter, has said that this is not good enough. He has also apologised himself for his mistakes in dealing with the matter. He has not however said he will not reimpose the excommunication if satisfaction is not forthcoming. Fair enough, as the excommunication and Williamson’s rabid pronouncements had nothing to do with each other in the beginning. Fellay has dropped Williamson like a hot potato, an act of self-serving hypocrisy, as Williamson has only publicisized views held by many, if not most, members of the SSPX. It is fairly obvious that Fellay wants to avoid being tainted with the same brush. As Williamson himself said, he is Jonah being jettisoned to appease the storm. One wonder sif Williamson reflects that he is suffering the opprobrium he has heaped on others so many times. With intimate knowledge of the SSPX and Williamson, I cannot see that the one will be reconciled with the other.

“As Williamson himself said, he is Jonah being jettisoned to appease the storm.”

Williamson needs to reread The Book of Jonah. Jonah willingly throws himself into the sea after a drawing of lots identifies him as having brought about God’s anger. He decides that if he has caused divine anger that others should not suffer. He is not “jettisoned.”

A little self-aggrandizement.

Indeed.

Prove Willaimson WRONG by proving that the gas chambers actually existed as murder weapons…otherwise, shut your stupid yaps.

Ah, the gentle voice of reason. Well, gentlemen, you heard what the intelligent man said.

We goyim are awakening to the fabrication of history.

Every statement made by Bishop Williamson in his interview is carefully and scientifically refuted in my paper entitled:
“TECHNICAL AND HISTORICAL RESPONSES TO STATEMENTS MADE BY BISHOP RICHARD WILLIAMSON CONCERNING THE HOLOCAUST.” This paper can be read on line at:

http://www.holocaust-history.org/williamson/williamson.shtml

Harry W. Mazal OBE

It seems Williamson is to stand trial in Germany. The court has urged him to be present in person. The trial may begin in February of March 2010.

To William Henderson, Harry Mazal and and all those who use their intellect and humanity to uncover, examine and sustain the truth, a very heartfelt thank you. I hesitate to say this but while it may seem like forensic science but it is also an act of love and necessary work from which we all benefit.

This can be my 2nd see to this weblog. We are starting up a new initiative while in the exact same category as this blog. Your blog site supplied us with essential information and facts to give good results on. You’ve gotten finished a marvellous employment.

Richard Williamson is, at the moment, an embarassment for the Society of St Pius X, which desires re-union with the Vatican. Unfortunately this mindset is not limited to Bishop Williamson. He represents a fairly prevalent, though not universal mindset,within the Society. The Superior General of the Society, Bernard Fellay, is desparate to keep this from the world media and from the Pope. In particular he will not want Williamson’s other views made manifest. He believes the Jews and Masons are involved in an international conspiracy to dominate the world and subvert Christianity. He believes the Protiocols of the Learned Elders of Zion is genuine. And Williamson is a loose canon. He has been remarkably clear and open to anyone who asks his views. Benedict XVI has been naive in this matter, to say the least. Benedict has ordered Williamson to disavow holocaust denial. It will be interesting to see if Williamson will comply. The Vatican needs to take a harder line. It will damage itself and irreparably dishonour the memory of the Shoah if it admits such as Williamson back into the fold without an explicit disavowal of his hate-filled dogmas.

You badly underrate Williamson (and so did the Holy Father – he should have asked some of the conservative Catholic blogs, to whom he has long been an object of ridicule and detestation). It is not about the Holocaust alone; he is an all-around extreme reactionary who believes that women should not be educated (I trust he is willing to explain why to female Doctors of the Church such as St.Catherine of Siena or St.Theresa of Avila) and who ranted at the musical The Sound of Music as an expression of the Devil. That he is Camridge-educated means nothing; if Cambridge could produce all those Communist traitors, there is no reason why it should not have produced a maniac whose obsessions go beyond even Fascism. What is more, the reason why the SSPX have not yet silenced him or forced him out is that it is full of people like him. Before anything can be done with them, for instance, they will have to remove the belief in Deicide (the idea that the Jews are guilty, collectively and from generation to generation, for the murder of Jesus Christ – which the Catholic Church never accepted) from their official website, and disown a huge amount of their own publications.

Correction: Williamson has not been ordered ‘to completely recant his views if he wants to return to the Catholic church’. An ultimatum has been made requiring him to recant before he would be permitted to exercise any episcopal authority within the Church. Since his episcopal ordination was illicit — the grounds on which he was excommunicated along with the other SSPX bishops –, the Pope is under no obligation to grant him any jurisdiction as a bishop, and this week has made clear that he will not consider it unless Williamson ‘completely distances’ himself from denial of the Shoah.

Also this week, a couple of voices of reason began to emerge, questioning the media frenzy and overreaction of Jewish groups to the lifting of the SSPX excommunications. That both these voices are Jewish — one a rabbi — should give pause.

http://newsweek.washingtonpost.com/onfaith/irwin_kula/2009/02/jewish_reaction_to_pope_dispro.html

http://zenit.org/article-24999?l=english

Richard wiliamson is not only an embarrasment to the Church but also a rabid Anti Semite who is bent on illustrating that Jews are seeking sympathy on a grand scale.
He should be shown as the monarch he believes himself to be. See pictures above walking around like “holier than thou”.
The Pope not only bad a huge mistake but is incredible devisive himself. he is a very smart man who know what is going on i this world. to believe he never knew about Williamson’s views is to believe pigs can fly.
He should never be permitted to be associated with richeousness.

why does it matter if he believes that the holocaust occurred or not? I have never heard any information that contradicts the holocaust but that is not to say that none exists? without extensive investigation who can say for certain how many jews were killed? Obviously there were many jews killed but it could be less than what is commonly accepted. In any case the bishop should be allowed to hold this view. if someone decides that they dont believe a certain event took place, why should everyone else care? The jews don’t believe Jesus is the son of god, and a catholic bishop doesn’t believe that 6 million jews were killed in the holocaust. that’s fine, people are entitled to their own beliefs and it is just as wrong to try to force an opinion on someone as it is to change one they already hold.

But Williamson is a public figure. It is not merely a matter of private conscience. I might believe guinea pigs are plotting to take over the world. But as long as it remains in my fevered brain no harm is done. Williamson is vomiting this bile as a matter of public duty. He was idiotic or missionary enough to vent his views on television. This is not the first time he has done this. There is no reputable evidence to suggest that the Final Solution was anything other than an orchestrated extermination of all Jews in Nazi-ruled lands. People like Williamson are not only nutters. They are rallying points for Nazism, which is, alas, anything but dead. If Williamson does not recant, the excommunication should be reimposed.

Michael,

You make a poor analogy by comparing belief in religion with history. WW2 history, and the holocaust in particular, is not based on faith, but demonstrable facts from witnesses, documents, and artifacts.

The goal of holocaust deniers, like williamson, is political: they want to rehabilitate Nazism and fascism in general and Adolf Hitler in particular — and to promote anti-Semitism. They also seek to foster anti-Israel sentiment, the goal being to undermine a once emotional justification for Israel’s existence.

Listening to Williamson’s interviews, the charges he makes against the historical record, and the purported sources he relies on, are demonstrably false.

Everyone is entitled to an opinion about the causes and consequences of the historical record, but not to falsify the historical record for political purposes – something Williamson has done.

Williamson cannot honestly hold an “opinion” that there were no gas chambers or only 300,000 Jews killed in the holocaust anymore than I can hold the “opnion” that WW2 never happened.

Well said Ron.

Michael
You are correct that everyone is entitled to their beliefs and or opinions. I need to qualify that. A person who is publicaly influential and persuasive and who carries hate and incorrect data can do more harm than good. If Richard Williamson backs up his theory or his opinon with some facts, then perhaps he would be a credible person and a moral ambassador of the Catholic Church. To say “I don’t think, or I don’t belive” that jews were killed in gas chambers is merely an inflamable opinion that causes much pain if not substantiated.
This Bishop needs to visit the concentration camp facilities and or holocaust museums to find the facts. Then perhaps he can recant his vile opinion with some form of honesty and integrity.
Until such a time the Pope should put his re-instatement on hold which would only hold the catholic Church in good stead.
I have been to these inhuman camps and have personally seen what they were used for and there can be no doubt what happened. No one ever said 6 million were gassed, but he said No humans were gassed at all!!! IDIOTIC to say the least, and YES it is Anti-Semitic as it pokes at facts regarding the Jewish peoples history.

Andrew

Andrew, perhaps as penance, the Pope should require Williamson to visit one of those diabolical camps. I cannot imagine what you must have felt there.

somewhat related to the topic of visiting the camps, there is an alternative that i recently stumbled upon: the museum and memorial at Auschwitz-Birkenau itself http://en.auschwitz.org.pl/m/

The english/polish website is filled with visitor information, photos, documents, artifacts and even a web-cam.

Perhaps someone would like to explain why the Jews demanded and got the removal of the crosses from Auschwitz – these crosses were placed by Polish patriots to mark the place where Poles laid down their lives for Poland at Auschwitz – yet the Jews objected to these crosses – with John Paul II’s approval and consent these crosses were removed by the Polish Army at the dead of night. Also a convent at Auschwitz was relocated again at the request of the Jews. These actions are an attempt to deny that Catholic Poles died at Auschwitz. Why has the Catholic Church not supported the crosses at Auschwitz – don’t the lives & deaths of Catholic Poles count for anything???

Irena

It is called conflict resolution.

For Jews, Auschwitz is the largest Jewish burial ground in the world – over a million jews died there – and it’s a synonym for Jewish suffering. For Jews who want the site to be an international one – because of the scope of the crimes there – Jews think it odd that anyone would want to have Auschwitz associated with Christianity. To them, putting up crosses is seen as offensive to Jewish suffering, and needlessly associating the crimes at Auscwitz with Christianity.

For Poles under communism, Auschwitz historically never had a Jewish connection, it was only a memorial to Communism’s fight against facism. After communism fell, the Catholic Church honored the Catholics who died there – especially the two Polish saints who were martyred, with a large cross.

Auschwitz, after 1989, became a point of conflict between Poles, Catholics and Jews because there was no plan for resolving conflicting opinions. A convent was opened, a large cross erected, then Jewish stars were put up, and then local activists put up over 300 smaller crosses – anger was growing and the point of the memorial was being lost.

To end the controversy, a declaration regarding Auschwitz was initialed in 1997 by Poland, Yad Vashem, and the Holocaust Memorial Museum to create a master plan for the site, preserve the UNESCO protective zones, physically link camps, and prohibit the introduction of any buildings or religious symbols in the future.

Hopefully conflict resolved.

“The goal of holocaust deniers, like williamson, is political: they want to rehabilitate Nazism and fascism in general and Adolf Hitler in particular — and to promote anti-Semitism.”

Any proof that those are Williamson’s wishes? To “… rehabilitate Nazism and fascism in general and Adolf Hitler in particular — and to promote anti-Semitism.” Are we mind-readers now? If you can’t prove that those are Williamson’s desires (and you can’t) then what’s the difference between a liar like him and a liar like you?

Fred

“Any proof that those are Williamson’s wishes?”

Do you have any other explanation as to why somebody would want to deny the holocaust? Given all the evidence , still living witnesses, documents, auschwitz itself? Why do you think he would deny the holocaust?

Certainly my own personal experience of anti- semites is that they deny the holocaust. You will notice it is a feature of neo- nazis. Go, for example to Rense.com.

The anti-semite I know also is obsessed with 911 conspiracy theories. Originally, he got into all this stuff through David Icke. And he’s theories of the Illuminati trying to take over the world. David Icke actually believed the “Protocols of the Elders of Zion” (i.e Jewish plot for world domination).

Personally I think that these white supremacists need a scapegoat and they do believe the Protocols. But then if you believe that the jews are running the world, how do you explain the holocaust where 6 million jews were killed?………………You can start by denying the holocaust.

I don’t know of all that many left or right-of-centre types who engage in Holocaust Denial. This tends to be the preserve of Nazis (or their sympathisers), or radical Islamists. I think we can safely say that ‘Bishop’ Williamson does not belong to the latter category.

Joseph

Well depends what you mean by “left” or “right”.

I think the Rense crowd are essentially white supremacists/neo nazis. They seem to blame the jews for everything. For example I have seen articles that suggest that white girls only go out with black guys because of the porn industry – which of course is funded by the jews.

Bizarely enough, the person I personally knew who got into antisemitism was actually a left wing hippy. He seemed to have been introduced to this by the writings of David Icke, a new age hippy. David Icke refers to a plot by the Illuminati (shape shifting lizards- who can appear human, but are not really human) which some people believe is a code word for jews. Certainly David Icke was kicked out of the Green Party as he endorses the Protocols of the Elders of Zion.

Some people believe that David Icke is just crazy and does actually believe in shape shifting lizards. However, Icke himself has said that he is alarmed at the number of neo- nazis who attend his events and nod knowingly about who the illumati really are.

The person I knew was just angry with the world because it did not confirm to his ideas of what the world should be (peace loving hippies). Therefore he had to create a scapegoat to explain why his vision was wrong (jews cause all wars according to the Protocols).

In my view, people who have strong views on how the world should be are often disappointed and need a scapegoat. Hitler was a German Supremacist, he needed to explain how the Germans lost WW1……step up the scapegoats.

Though recent research suggests that the Nazis did believe there was an actual Jewish plot to take over the world. In his last will and testament he claimed he did not want a war…..it was world jewry…He also made the following prediction:

“Centuries will pass away, but out of the ruins of our towns and monuments the hatred against those finally responsible whom we have to thank for everything, international Jewry and its helpers, will grow.”

Fred

”Are we mind-readers now? If you can’t prove that those are Williamson’s desires (and you can’t) then what’s the difference between a liar like him and a liar like you?”

You don’t have to be a mind reader to make the assumption that Williamson is either anti-semitic, a supporter of fascism, nazism or (and you left out) wants to foster anti-Israel sentiment, or all of the above.

Williamson, in the interviews he himself gives, engages in Holocaust denial, relies on arguments which have previously been disproved in courts and discredited in academic literature, and are identical to arguments commonly found in anti-semitic, nazi, fascist and anti-israeli literature.

Far from being clairvoyant, Williamson’s arguments are so obvious that tracing their roots to well known sources takes mere minutes.

Here is a question for you Fred. If the British Bishop’s wishes weren’t so obvious, why did Pope Benedict make highly unusual statements regarding the issue, and why did Germany consider pressing criminal charges?

BISHOP RICHARD WILLIAMSON NAMED TO UNSEXIEST MEN OF THE YEAR BY THEPHOENIX.COM
http://unsexy.thephoenix.com/unsexy/2009/

For those who can’t be bothered to sift through, he’s number 51.

Williamson is obviously right. The Jews retreated into the Soviet Union – Jewish commissar land – and then went to Palestine, the US and South America after the war.

http://www.therebel.org/opinion/history/the_mother_of_all_lies_200710145813/

Icke is either in on it–a conscious disinformant, or as the elite (and I dont mean just Jewish but The Rich!! And Yes they Do exist–a small percent of them, and who want to keep power and the ‘masses’ dumbed down) or as is known by the propagandists “a useful idiot”. because what his silly and very racist theories does is DIVERt people away from the fact that 9/11 was a false flag operation!

Richard Williamson is, at the moment, an embarassment for the Society of St Pius X, which desires re-union with the Vatican. Unfortunately this mindset is not limited to Bishop Williamson. He represents a fairly prevalent, though not universal mindset,within the Society. The Superior General of the Society, Bernard Fellay, is desparate to keep this from the world media and from the Pope. In particular he will not want Williamson’s other views made manifest. He believes the Jews and Masons are involved in an international conspiracy to dominate the world and subvert Christianity. He believes the Protiocols of the Learned Elders of Zion is genuine. And Williamson is a loose canon. He has been remarkably clear and open to anyone who asks his views. Benedict XVI has been naive in this matter, to say the least. Benedict has ordered Williamson to disavow holocaust denial. It will be interesting to see if Williamson will comply. The Vatican needs to take a harder line. It will damage itself and irreparably dishonour the memory of the Shoah if it admits such as Williamson back into the fold without an explicit disavowal of his hate-filled dogmas.

You badly underrate Williamson (and so did the Holy Father – he should have asked some of the conservative Catholic blogs, to whom he has long been an object of ridicule and detestation). It is not about the Holocaust alone; he is an all-around extreme reactionary who believes that women should not be educated (I trust he is willing to explain why to female Doctors of the Church such as St.Catherine of Siena or St.Theresa of Avila) and who ranted at the musical The Sound of Music as an expression of the Devil. That he is Camridge-educated means nothing; if Cambridge could produce all those Communist traitors, there is no reason why it should not have produced a maniac whose obsessions go beyond even Fascism. What is more, the reason why the SSPX have not yet silenced him or forced him out is that it is full of people like him. Before anything can be done with them, for instance, they will have to remove the belief in Deicide (the idea that the Jews are guilty, collectively and from generation to generation, for the murder of Jesus Christ – which the Catholic Church never accepted) from their official website, and disown a huge amount of their own publications.

Correction: Williamson has not been ordered ‘to completely recant his views if he wants to return to the Catholic church’. An ultimatum has been made requiring him to recant before he would be permitted to exercise any episcopal authority within the Church. Since his episcopal ordination was illicit — the grounds on which he was excommunicated along with the other SSPX bishops –, the Pope is under no obligation to grant him any jurisdiction as a bishop, and this week has made clear that he will not consider it unless Williamson ‘completely distances’ himself from denial of the Shoah.

Also this week, a couple of voices of reason began to emerge, questioning the media frenzy and overreaction of Jewish groups to the lifting of the SSPX excommunications. That both these voices are Jewish — one a rabbi — should give pause.

http://newsweek.washingtonpost.com/onfaith/irwin_kula/2009/02/jewish_reaction_to_pope_dispro.html

http://zenit.org/article-24999?l=english

Richard wiliamson is not only an embarrasment to the Church but also a rabid Anti Semite who is bent on illustrating that Jews are seeking sympathy on a grand scale.
He should be shown as the monarch he believes himself to be. See pictures above walking around like “holier than thou”.
The Pope not only bad a huge mistake but is incredible devisive himself. he is a very smart man who know what is going on i this world. to believe he never knew about Williamson’s views is to believe pigs can fly.
He should never be permitted to be associated with richeousness.

why does it matter if he believes that the holocaust occurred or not? I have never heard any information that contradicts the holocaust but that is not to say that none exists? without extensive investigation who can say for certain how many jews were killed? Obviously there were many jews killed but it could be less than what is commonly accepted. In any case the bishop should be allowed to hold this view. if someone decides that they dont believe a certain event took place, why should everyone else care? The jews don’t believe Jesus is the son of god, and a catholic bishop doesn’t believe that 6 million jews were killed in the holocaust. that’s fine, people are entitled to their own beliefs and it is just as wrong to try to force an opinion on someone as it is to change one they already hold.

But Williamson is a public figure. It is not merely a matter of private conscience. I might believe guinea pigs are plotting to take over the world. But as long as it remains in my fevered brain no harm is done. Williamson is vomiting this bile as a matter of public duty. He was idiotic or missionary enough to vent his views on television. This is not the first time he has done this. There is no reputable evidence to suggest that the Final Solution was anything other than an orchestrated extermination of all Jews in Nazi-ruled lands. People like Williamson are not only nutters. They are rallying points for Nazism, which is, alas, anything but dead. If Williamson does not recant, the excommunication should be reimposed.

Michael,

You make a poor analogy by comparing belief in religion with history. WW2 history, and the holocaust in particular, is not based on faith, but demonstrable facts from witnesses, documents, and artifacts.

The goal of holocaust deniers, like williamson, is political: they want to rehabilitate Nazism and fascism in general and Adolf Hitler in particular — and to promote anti-Semitism. They also seek to foster anti-Israel sentiment, the goal being to undermine a once emotional justification for Israel’s existence.

Listening to Williamson’s interviews, the charges he makes against the historical record, and the purported sources he relies on, are demonstrably false.

Everyone is entitled to an opinion about the causes and consequences of the historical record, but not to falsify the historical record for political purposes – something Williamson has done.

Williamson cannot honestly hold an “opinion” that there were no gas chambers or only 300,000 Jews killed in the holocaust anymore than I can hold the “opnion” that WW2 never happened.

Well said Ron.

Michael
You are correct that everyone is entitled to their beliefs and or opinions. I need to qualify that. A person who is publicaly influential and persuasive and who carries hate and incorrect data can do more harm than good. If Richard Williamson backs up his theory or his opinon with some facts, then perhaps he would be a credible person and a moral ambassador of the Catholic Church. To say “I don’t think, or I don’t belive” that jews were killed in gas chambers is merely an inflamable opinion that causes much pain if not substantiated.
This Bishop needs to visit the concentration camp facilities and or holocaust museums to find the facts. Then perhaps he can recant his vile opinion with some form of honesty and integrity.
Until such a time the Pope should put his re-instatement on hold which would only hold the catholic Church in good stead.
I have been to these inhuman camps and have personally seen what they were used for and there can be no doubt what happened. No one ever said 6 million were gassed, but he said No humans were gassed at all!!! IDIOTIC to say the least, and YES it is Anti-Semitic as it pokes at facts regarding the Jewish peoples history.

Andrew

Andrew, perhaps as penance, the Pope should require Williamson to visit one of those diabolical camps. I cannot imagine what you must have felt there.

somewhat related to the topic of visiting the camps, there is an alternative that i recently stumbled upon: the museum and memorial at Auschwitz-Birkenau itself http://en.auschwitz.org.pl/m/

The english/polish website is filled with visitor information, photos, documents, artifacts and even a web-cam.

Perhaps someone would like to explain why the Jews demanded and got the removal of the crosses from Auschwitz – these crosses were placed by Polish patriots to mark the place where Poles laid down their lives for Poland at Auschwitz – yet the Jews objected to these crosses – with John Paul II’s approval and consent these crosses were removed by the Polish Army at the dead of night. Also a convent at Auschwitz was relocated again at the request of the Jews. These actions are an attempt to deny that Catholic Poles died at Auschwitz. Why has the Catholic Church not supported the crosses at Auschwitz – don’t the lives & deaths of Catholic Poles count for anything???

Irena

It is called conflict resolution.

For Jews, Auschwitz is the largest Jewish burial ground in the world – over a million jews died there – and it’s a synonym for Jewish suffering. For Jews who want the site to be an international one – because of the scope of the crimes there – Jews think it odd that anyone would want to have Auschwitz associated with Christianity. To them, putting up crosses is seen as offensive to Jewish suffering, and needlessly associating the crimes at Auscwitz with Christianity.

For Poles under communism, Auschwitz historically never had a Jewish connection, it was only a memorial to Communism’s fight against facism. After communism fell, the Catholic Church honored the Catholics who died there – especially the two Polish saints who were martyred, with a large cross.

Auschwitz, after 1989, became a point of conflict between Poles, Catholics and Jews because there was no plan for resolving conflicting opinions. A convent was opened, a large cross erected, then Jewish stars were put up, and then local activists put up over 300 smaller crosses – anger was growing and the point of the memorial was being lost.

To end the controversy, a declaration regarding Auschwitz was initialed in 1997 by Poland, Yad Vashem, and the Holocaust Memorial Museum to create a master plan for the site, preserve the UNESCO protective zones, physically link camps, and prohibit the introduction of any buildings or religious symbols in the future.

Hopefully conflict resolved.

“The goal of holocaust deniers, like williamson, is political: they want to rehabilitate Nazism and fascism in general and Adolf Hitler in particular — and to promote anti-Semitism.”

Any proof that those are Williamson’s wishes? To “… rehabilitate Nazism and fascism in general and Adolf Hitler in particular — and to promote anti-Semitism.” Are we mind-readers now? If you can’t prove that those are Williamson’s desires (and you can’t) then what’s the difference between a liar like him and a liar like you?

Fred

“Any proof that those are Williamson’s wishes?”

Do you have any other explanation as to why somebody would want to deny the holocaust? Given all the evidence , still living witnesses, documents, auschwitz itself? Why do you think he would deny the holocaust?

Certainly my own personal experience of anti- semites is that they deny the holocaust. You will notice it is a feature of neo- nazis. Go, for example to Rense.com.

The anti-semite I know also is obsessed with 911 conspiracy theories. Originally, he got into all this stuff through David Icke. And he’s theories of the Illuminati trying to take over the world. David Icke actually believed the “Protocols of the Elders of Zion” (i.e Jewish plot for world domination).

Personally I think that these white supremacists need a scapegoat and they do believe the Protocols. But then if you believe that the jews are running the world, how do you explain the holocaust where 6 million jews were killed?………………You can start by denying the holocaust.

I don’t know of all that many left or right-of-centre types who engage in Holocaust Denial. This tends to be the preserve of Nazis (or their sympathisers), or radical Islamists. I think we can safely say that ‘Bishop’ Williamson does not belong to the latter category.

Joseph

Well depends what you mean by “left” or “right”.

I think the Rense crowd are essentially white supremacists/neo nazis. They seem to blame the jews for everything. For example I have seen articles that suggest that white girls only go out with black guys because of the porn industry – which of course is funded by the jews.

Bizarely enough, the person I personally knew who got into antisemitism was actually a left wing hippy. He seemed to have been introduced to this by the writings of David Icke, a new age hippy. David Icke refers to a plot by the Illuminati (shape shifting lizards- who can appear human, but are not really human) which some people believe is a code word for jews. Certainly David Icke was kicked out of the Green Party as he endorses the Protocols of the Elders of Zion.

Some people believe that David Icke is just crazy and does actually believe in shape shifting lizards. However, Icke himself has said that he is alarmed at the number of neo- nazis who attend his events and nod knowingly about who the illumati really are.

The person I knew was just angry with the world because it did not confirm to his ideas of what the world should be (peace loving hippies). Therefore he had to create a scapegoat to explain why his vision was wrong (jews cause all wars according to the Protocols).

In my view, people who have strong views on how the world should be are often disappointed and need a scapegoat. Hitler was a German Supremacist, he needed to explain how the Germans lost WW1……step up the scapegoats.

Though recent research suggests that the Nazis did believe there was an actual Jewish plot to take over the world. In his last will and testament he claimed he did not want a war…..it was world jewry…He also made the following prediction:

“Centuries will pass away, but out of the ruins of our towns and monuments the hatred against those finally responsible whom we have to thank for everything, international Jewry and its helpers, will grow.”

Fred

”Are we mind-readers now? If you can’t prove that those are Williamson’s desires (and you can’t) then what’s the difference between a liar like him and a liar like you?”

You don’t have to be a mind reader to make the assumption that Williamson is either anti-semitic, a supporter of fascism, nazism or (and you left out) wants to foster anti-Israel sentiment, or all of the above.

Williamson, in the interviews he himself gives, engages in Holocaust denial, relies on arguments which have previously been disproved in courts and discredited in academic literature, and are identical to arguments commonly found in anti-semitic, nazi, fascist and anti-israeli literature.

Far from being clairvoyant, Williamson’s arguments are so obvious that tracing their roots to well known sources takes mere minutes.

Here is a question for you Fred. If the British Bishop’s wishes weren’t so obvious, why did Pope Benedict make highly unusual statements regarding the issue, and why did Germany consider pressing criminal charges?

BISHOP RICHARD WILLIAMSON NAMED TO UNSEXIEST MEN OF THE YEAR BY THEPHOENIX.COM
http://unsexy.thephoenix.com/unsexy/2009/

For those who can’t be bothered to sift through, he’s number 51.

Williamson is obviously right. The Jews retreated into the Soviet Union – Jewish commissar land – and then went to Palestine, the US and South America after the war.

http://www.therebel.org/opinion/history/the_mother_of_all_lies_200710145813/

Icke is either in on it–a conscious disinformant, or as the elite (and I dont mean just Jewish but The Rich!! And Yes they Do exist–a small percent of them, and who want to keep power and the ‘masses’ dumbed down) or as is known by the propagandists “a useful idiot”. because what his silly and very racist theories does is DIVERt people away from the fact that 9/11 was a false flag operation!

It’s mostly disinformation. To understand what disinformation and how it works try researching Common Purpose on the interwebs.

See?

Your drowning in bullshit about giant lizards and Bavarian Illuminati and the New World Order. Any closer to the truth? Does it all seem crazy?

Thinking and knowing are actually quite hard.

Good spot, R.P. I was going to write about this, but you beat me to it.

Charlie Brooker has a way with words, and has already got up the noses of the 9/11 ‘truthers’. He hits the nail on the head with this comment:

‘The other day I tuned in to Eerie Investigations, in which the host, a strangely simpering woman with Eerie Investigations printed on her T-shirt, conducted vox-pop interviews with people at an anti-ID card rally. There are a thousand valid reasons for opposing ID cards and questioning everything the government does, but instead both the host and her interviewees spent most of their time talking about how we’re all going to have microchips planted in our heads as part of the New World Order (which, naturally, orchestrated the 9/11 attacks), intermittently breaking from this theme to dismiss the general public as idiotic, docile sheep with such towering self-assurance it made you actively wonder whether labouring under a fascist police state in which government computers monitored your dreams and doled out electric shocks each time you had a subversive thought would be preferable to living in freedom alongside these massive wankers.’

Aside from the invective, he has a point to make about the conspiracy cranks, notably the 9/11 denialists who describe the broad mass of the populace as ’sheeple’. It’s more comforting for these kooks to assume that their failure to make any progress despite 7 years of effort has more to do with the innate stupidity of the vast majority of the human race (but not them, naturally). Otherwise they might have to ask whether their failure is more to do with anyone having an ounce of common sense rejecting their lies about 9/11, not to mention the sheer flimsiness of their arguments about the September 2001 attacks being an ‘inside job’.

I suspect that, deep down, ‘truthers’ are seriously misanthropic.

Question Everything! Oh, except the conspiracy bullshit. That’s real. Really.

*sigh*

“Conspiracy theorists need to believe their viewpoints are being suppressed, rather than, say, assessed and dismissed as ropey and ludicrous.” – I disagree with Brooker. Firstly, he makes the usual unfounded innuendo that “conspiracy theorists” have some psychological desire to find conspiracies. Secondly and perhaps not too surprising, is his opinion that conspiracy claims should be. prima facie, judged to be “ludicrous”, without any investigation of the evidence. I hope Brooker is never selected for jury service. He may need to be informed that the inchoate offence of conspiracy forms a major part of English criminal law.

Political conspiracies have existed as fact and been exposed throughout history – the Gunpowder plot, Watergate, Iran-Contra. The more recent attempt by Blair and Bush to co-ordinate faked evidence of Iraqi WMDs may, in hindsight, be considered a criminal conspiracy on an international scale.

Unfortunately, “conspiracy” has, somehow, become lumped together with the dubious powers of healing crystals and odd new agey prophecies. There are also clearly a lot of snake oil salespersons making a fast buck off touting dubious products. But we should be cautious about throwing the baby out with the bath water.

I couldn’t care less about the Knights Templar etc etc etc but I really do doubt the ability of the MSM to initiate and investigate fully when they seem to have made their minds up already. One could argue that Brooker’s position of pre-determination on the entire gamut of alleged conspiracies is in itself contraknowledge. What research or investgation has he done? Or, as I suspect, is he just trying to look smart and knowing among his Grauniad media mates?

“Your drowning in bullshit about giant lizards and Bavarian Illuminati and the New World Order. Any closer to the truth? Does it all seem crazy?”

Er….not really…..mostly anti globalist stuff…..opposition seems to be politically driven.
The Illuminati/lizard/icke connection is really only used in defense of Common Purpose by discrediting their opposition by association.

Maybe Icke is a servant of the global masters???????

http://freeyourmind-hiddentruths.blogspot.com/

My favourite Edge Media moment is David Shayler’s announcement of the current identity of the Devil: a middle-aged professional paranoiac from Totnes called Ian Crane, who has helpfully posted the footage on Youtube.

http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=orfSNlbeJ4M

Shayler spent a lot of time in Totnes a couple of years ago shortly before delaring in Glastonbury that he is the Messiah. He was the star of the show at several twoofer events here and elsewhere, organised by Crane. It seems there has been a parting of the ways.

I once saw Shayler peering into a Totnes butcher’s shop window. Who knows what signs and wonders were vouchsafed to him among the sausages? Lest I be accused of mocking the afflicted, I’ll just point out that Crane and the rest of them follow essentially the same procedure for discovering the ‘hidden knowledge’ they then package and sell to the gullible/stupid. Find some juicy-sounding factoids, fancifully string them together, and artfully arrange them in the window of the nutbar emporium.

visit free your mind for more info
http://freeyourmind-hiddentruths.blogspot.com/

I think Youtube has become a favorite place for Truthers to spread their innane propaganda- I particulalry like the Truther youtube posters who delete all comments from people who are critical of the Truther theories- This proves how Truthers cannot debate the issue. Since they reject facts, they have nothing to support their theories. I like the one how they explain away the lack of whistleblowers or leaks from the teams of people who they claim planted explosive in the WTC, by saying those people were probrolly shot. Since they have zero proof these people ever existed, they certianly can’t prove these phantoms were shot! Truthers twist it around and say the burden is on the critics to prove they didn’t exist. Truthers disgust me, but on some levels they amuse me, in that it’s fascinating to watch people abandon logic when they try to defend a position, and just make things up as they go along.

This channel could be potentially rather dangerous.
There seems to be a fair amount of interesting content, but you’d better have the old ‘BS detector’ switched on to filter out the rubbish.
Ironic though, that its aired over Rupert Murdoch’s network….The acclaimed trumpeter of the neocon NWO and all that …..So much for supressed knowledge.

The alternative is listen to the Jew media spread their lies about 9/11, and deny Jew involvement in the coverup. No thanks.
I prefer sites where people are not afraid to reveal the politically incorrect TRUTH about who was behind the attacks in JEW York, Washington and PA on September 11

Brooker’s article is spot on.

If any of the new wave of conspiracy theorists were correct in their arrogant assumption that we are all brainwashed by a higher power, one of two things would have happened –

1. They would all be arrested, imprisoned or shot.
2. The NWO would have stopped all media coverage of them.

Given that youtube and the TV networks are supposed to be run by the Illuminati, these media outlets appear incredibly friendly towards critics of their organisation. Youtube features literally thousands of videos sceaming ‘911 WAS AN INSIDE JOB!’

Of course, the conspiracy theorists will turn around and say ‘but that’s what THEY want you to think’, which is a get out clause for everything. They are paranoid, obsessive, arrogant and boring.

i prefer to do my own thinking and checking of facts ,i have a brain and i use it(unlike a lot of people it seems who have left a comment here) i listen to both sides of an argument, i check my facts and come to an informed conclussion. you will notice in the various media how so called conspiracy theorists are constantly being attached to the elvis is alive and the obama is a lizard brigade ,so called journalists who have no interest in the truth trying to ridicule and attack the people who only want the truth to be told, this is the most common method used by the media(we cant argue the true facts because they might just gave a better more acurate argument so instead we try to discredit them as fools who believe elvis is still alive)and sadly some people are taken in by not thinking for them selves. a story came out of the us government giving syphilis to people and leaving them untreted and they died(they wanted to see the effects the disease would have if left untreated) this was proven true, as of this date swine flu has killed only 400 worldwide(yet the us government is talking about forced vaccination against this pandemic and trying to inject us with untested and out of date drugs(by the way they gave the drug companies immunity in case of deaths from the drug or serious side effects, so no case can be brought against them should people die from the vaccine)worldwide the regular flu kills around 100000 a year and no one is forced to take a vaccine ,swine flu has killed only 400 and apparently we have a pandemic. all the people who saw jfk shot by the grassy knoll were either called liars they had mental problems or were completly ommited from the warren report(because their evidence was not what the warren commision and the government wanted people to hear,they wanted 1 shooter lee harvey oswald) 3 dallas police men witnessed the finding of the rifle he was said to have used and made reports of a different rifle being found(not the oswald rifle)witness statements put oswald no where near the sixth floor between 12.00 midday and 12.30 the time of the shooting ,but these people were either ommited from the warren commision or their statments were changed to alter the time scale(in order to make it look as tho oswald had the time he needed to do the shooting)all facts and can be checked and proven to be true if people care to look. any proper(so called conspiracy theorist) will have provable facts to back up there arguments and if they dont they wont speculate on them.go and check things out about jfk and 9/11 etc and use your mind and decide for your self.and no i dont believe elvis is alive and that obama is a lizard,the truth is out there if we care to look. to sin by silence when we should protest makes cowards out of man(ella wheeler wilcox). and finally osama bin laden the man they say was behind 9/11 the most wanted man in the world and number 1 on the fbi most wanted list,no where on the fbi most wanted does it say he is wanted for any crime relating to 9/11 and when questioned on this they said its because there is no credible evidence against him. check it out its true.open your minds and think for yourself unlike some of the people above .

I would like for Brooker and the other side of the 9/11 to put they evidence forward with the Governments putting all they information forward too. If the Governments and Medias have got nothing to hide from all sides then put it on the table. Then people like my self can look at the information and decide. Instead of having a media that puts forward a question some form of explanation and answer.

I was never taught that way, but I was taught to look at the problem or if one think something seems out of place then look at a piece of information no matter how absurd it may be. It doesn’t matter as long it is the truth.

I admit I am reading on issues which mainstream does try to avoid as I have been in the mainstream myself but not on high level but there is some forms of cover up that does go on, as there is battle to get the truth out. There is this viewpoint that some people think because they are on television or on the big screen they are gods.

To be honest we human beings are no more than beings that is using tools that is at ones disposal that are trying to come to interpretation of what in front of them and depending on people intelligence on many levels with EQ and IQ tags to one life. We use from the programming from birth not many levels not just political to make our decisions on issues. Then asked yourself this question as many people who don’t just take authority point view as god, as that would be retarded and moronic. Also at the same time when so call authority figures do get it right we must be humble and acknowledge that.

At the same time put the name calling of the “Sheep” and “Conspiracy Theorist” and “Tin Foil Hat wearers” reside to the grave while trying to evolve the human race conscience not hamper it through name calling and dismissals of information.

Also the people who have been calling people who do look at information to question have a right to furious for decades so call normal people have been calling group of people that question the government on certain issues conspiracy theorist who have information and information to back up they claims. as crack pots. Once you have one bit of information that shows the truth, doesn’t that then turn theory into possibility which closer to fact and away from theory.

Too many people are trying to keep they bubble world and not wanting to question representation of the true government, as the true government is the people. Who said people in Parliament and the White House are gods? and the same goes for the media. No being on this planet is god in the sense of being above anyone, it is illusion of one perception who is better than another human being.

So as presidents, prime ministers, so call Bilderberg group name after the place where they first met, Monsanto, FDA, WHO and others are no more than people in buildings with monopoly money (a tool). Then the main point is this, if people suspect or have probable cause and find information to bring to light no matter who it is, why not let the information come the forefront instead of hiding like the representational government of the people is doing. If the claims of the truth movement and all that has gone on is not true? Then why not step forward and prove it is a fraud. Unless the truth movement is right with the information they have got and the families of 9/11 through buildingwhat.org are also calling for justice.

I am not a 9/11 truther but more than anything, people in order to make up they own conclusion no matter how upsetting it is needs to be shared, instead of hiding the information like with CCTV footage. When you hide something, in my books and many other people I have met and emailed think the same as what I am about to type. When you hide something normally you are lying to the being in front you when there information that contradicts, then you must show what you hiding to clear you conscience. Unless people love laying with lies and deceptions.

I am not one of those, all I want is the truth from any side of the argument and not to be played like a fool.

And any comments that I find are stupid I will not reply. Thank you.

It’s mostly disinformation. To understand what disinformation and how it works try researching Common Purpose on the interwebs.

See?

Your drowning in bullshit about giant lizards and Bavarian Illuminati and the New World Order. Any closer to the truth? Does it all seem crazy?

Thinking and knowing are actually quite hard.

Good spot, R.P. I was going to write about this, but you beat me to it.

Charlie Brooker has a way with words, and has already got up the noses of the 9/11 ‘truthers’. He hits the nail on the head with this comment:

‘The other day I tuned in to Eerie Investigations, in which the host, a strangely simpering woman with Eerie Investigations printed on her T-shirt, conducted vox-pop interviews with people at an anti-ID card rally. There are a thousand valid reasons for opposing ID cards and questioning everything the government does, but instead both the host and her interviewees spent most of their time talking about how we’re all going to have microchips planted in our heads as part of the New World Order (which, naturally, orchestrated the 9/11 attacks), intermittently breaking from this theme to dismiss the general public as idiotic, docile sheep with such towering self-assurance it made you actively wonder whether labouring under a fascist police state in which government computers monitored your dreams and doled out electric shocks each time you had a subversive thought would be preferable to living in freedom alongside these massive wankers.’

Aside from the invective, he has a point to make about the conspiracy cranks, notably the 9/11 denialists who describe the broad mass of the populace as ’sheeple’. It’s more comforting for these kooks to assume that their failure to make any progress despite 7 years of effort has more to do with the innate stupidity of the vast majority of the human race (but not them, naturally). Otherwise they might have to ask whether their failure is more to do with anyone having an ounce of common sense rejecting their lies about 9/11, not to mention the sheer flimsiness of their arguments about the September 2001 attacks being an ‘inside job’.

I suspect that, deep down, ‘truthers’ are seriously misanthropic.

Question Everything! Oh, except the conspiracy bullshit. That’s real. Really.

*sigh*

“Conspiracy theorists need to believe their viewpoints are being suppressed, rather than, say, assessed and dismissed as ropey and ludicrous.” – I disagree with Brooker. Firstly, he makes the usual unfounded innuendo that “conspiracy theorists” have some psychological desire to find conspiracies. Secondly and perhaps not too surprising, is his opinion that conspiracy claims should be. prima facie, judged to be “ludicrous”, without any investigation of the evidence. I hope Brooker is never selected for jury service. He may need to be informed that the inchoate offence of conspiracy forms a major part of English criminal law.

Political conspiracies have existed as fact and been exposed throughout history – the Gunpowder plot, Watergate, Iran-Contra. The more recent attempt by Blair and Bush to co-ordinate faked evidence of Iraqi WMDs may, in hindsight, be considered a criminal conspiracy on an international scale.

Unfortunately, “conspiracy” has, somehow, become lumped together with the dubious powers of healing crystals and odd new agey prophecies. There are also clearly a lot of snake oil salespersons making a fast buck off touting dubious products. But we should be cautious about throwing the baby out with the bath water.

I couldn’t care less about the Knights Templar etc etc etc but I really do doubt the ability of the MSM to initiate and investigate fully when they seem to have made their minds up already. One could argue that Brooker’s position of pre-determination on the entire gamut of alleged conspiracies is in itself contraknowledge. What research or investgation has he done? Or, as I suspect, is he just trying to look smart and knowing among his Grauniad media mates?

“Your drowning in bullshit about giant lizards and Bavarian Illuminati and the New World Order. Any closer to the truth? Does it all seem crazy?”

Er….not really…..mostly anti globalist stuff…..opposition seems to be politically driven.
The Illuminati/lizard/icke connection is really only used in defense of Common Purpose by discrediting their opposition by association.

Maybe Icke is a servant of the global masters???????

http://freeyourmind-hiddentruths.blogspot.com/

My favourite Edge Media moment is David Shayler’s announcement of the current identity of the Devil: a middle-aged professional paranoiac from Totnes called Ian Crane, who has helpfully posted the footage on Youtube.

http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=orfSNlbeJ4M

Shayler spent a lot of time in Totnes a couple of years ago shortly before delaring in Glastonbury that he is the Messiah. He was the star of the show at several twoofer events here and elsewhere, organised by Crane. It seems there has been a parting of the ways.

I once saw Shayler peering into a Totnes butcher’s shop window. Who knows what signs and wonders were vouchsafed to him among the sausages? Lest I be accused of mocking the afflicted, I’ll just point out that Crane and the rest of them follow essentially the same procedure for discovering the ‘hidden knowledge’ they then package and sell to the gullible/stupid. Find some juicy-sounding factoids, fancifully string them together, and artfully arrange them in the window of the nutbar emporium.

visit free your mind for more info
http://freeyourmind-hiddentruths.blogspot.com/

I think Youtube has become a favorite place for Truthers to spread their innane propaganda- I particulalry like the Truther youtube posters who delete all comments from people who are critical of the Truther theories- This proves how Truthers cannot debate the issue. Since they reject facts, they have nothing to support their theories. I like the one how they explain away the lack of whistleblowers or leaks from the teams of people who they claim planted explosive in the WTC, by saying those people were probrolly shot. Since they have zero proof these people ever existed, they certianly can’t prove these phantoms were shot! Truthers twist it around and say the burden is on the critics to prove they didn’t exist. Truthers disgust me, but on some levels they amuse me, in that it’s fascinating to watch people abandon logic when they try to defend a position, and just make things up as they go along.

This channel could be potentially rather dangerous.
There seems to be a fair amount of interesting content, but you’d better have the old ‘BS detector’ switched on to filter out the rubbish.
Ironic though, that its aired over Rupert Murdoch’s network….The acclaimed trumpeter of the neocon NWO and all that …..So much for supressed knowledge.

The alternative is listen to the Jew media spread their lies about 9/11, and deny Jew involvement in the coverup. No thanks.
I prefer sites where people are not afraid to reveal the politically incorrect TRUTH about who was behind the attacks in JEW York, Washington and PA on September 11

Brooker’s article is spot on.

If any of the new wave of conspiracy theorists were correct in their arrogant assumption that we are all brainwashed by a higher power, one of two things would have happened –

1. They would all be arrested, imprisoned or shot.
2. The NWO would have stopped all media coverage of them.

Given that youtube and the TV networks are supposed to be run by the Illuminati, these media outlets appear incredibly friendly towards critics of their organisation. Youtube features literally thousands of videos sceaming ‘911 WAS AN INSIDE JOB!’

Of course, the conspiracy theorists will turn around and say ‘but that’s what THEY want you to think’, which is a get out clause for everything. They are paranoid, obsessive, arrogant and boring.

i prefer to do my own thinking and checking of facts ,i have a brain and i use it(unlike a lot of people it seems who have left a comment here) i listen to both sides of an argument, i check my facts and come to an informed conclussion. you will notice in the various media how so called conspiracy theorists are constantly being attached to the elvis is alive and the obama is a lizard brigade ,so called journalists who have no interest in the truth trying to ridicule and attack the people who only want the truth to be told, this is the most common method used by the media(we cant argue the true facts because they might just gave a better more acurate argument so instead we try to discredit them as fools who believe elvis is still alive)and sadly some people are taken in by not thinking for them selves. a story came out of the us government giving syphilis to people and leaving them untreted and they died(they wanted to see the effects the disease would have if left untreated) this was proven true, as of this date swine flu has killed only 400 worldwide(yet the us government is talking about forced vaccination against this pandemic and trying to inject us with untested and out of date drugs(by the way they gave the drug companies immunity in case of deaths from the drug or serious side effects, so no case can be brought against them should people die from the vaccine)worldwide the regular flu kills around 100000 a year and no one is forced to take a vaccine ,swine flu has killed only 400 and apparently we have a pandemic. all the people who saw jfk shot by the grassy knoll were either called liars they had mental problems or were completly ommited from the warren report(because their evidence was not what the warren commision and the government wanted people to hear,they wanted 1 shooter lee harvey oswald) 3 dallas police men witnessed the finding of the rifle he was said to have used and made reports of a different rifle being found(not the oswald rifle)witness statements put oswald no where near the sixth floor between 12.00 midday and 12.30 the time of the shooting ,but these people were either ommited from the warren commision or their statments were changed to alter the time scale(in order to make it look as tho oswald had the time he needed to do the shooting)all facts and can be checked and proven to be true if people care to look. any proper(so called conspiracy theorist) will have provable facts to back up there arguments and if they dont they wont speculate on them.go and check things out about jfk and 9/11 etc and use your mind and decide for your self.and no i dont believe elvis is alive and that obama is a lizard,the truth is out there if we care to look. to sin by silence when we should protest makes cowards out of man(ella wheeler wilcox). and finally osama bin laden the man they say was behind 9/11 the most wanted man in the world and number 1 on the fbi most wanted list,no where on the fbi most wanted does it say he is wanted for any crime relating to 9/11 and when questioned on this they said its because there is no credible evidence against him. check it out its true.open your minds and think for yourself unlike some of the people above .

I would like for Brooker and the other side of the 9/11 to put they evidence forward with the Governments putting all they information forward too. If the Governments and Medias have got nothing to hide from all sides then put it on the table. Then people like my self can look at the information and decide. Instead of having a media that puts forward a question some form of explanation and answer.

I was never taught that way, but I was taught to look at the problem or if one think something seems out of place then look at a piece of information no matter how absurd it may be. It doesn’t matter as long it is the truth.

I admit I am reading on issues which mainstream does try to avoid as I have been in the mainstream myself but not on high level but there is some forms of cover up that does go on, as there is battle to get the truth out. There is this viewpoint that some people think because they are on television or on the big screen they are gods.

To be honest we human beings are no more than beings that is using tools that is at ones disposal that are trying to come to interpretation of what in front of them and depending on people intelligence on many levels with EQ and IQ tags to one life. We use from the programming from birth not many levels not just political to make our decisions on issues. Then asked yourself this question as many people who don’t just take authority point view as god, as that would be retarded and moronic. Also at the same time when so call authority figures do get it right we must be humble and acknowledge that.

At the same time put the name calling of the “Sheep” and “Conspiracy Theorist” and “Tin Foil Hat wearers” reside to the grave while trying to evolve the human race conscience not hamper it through name calling and dismissals of information.

Also the people who have been calling people who do look at information to question have a right to furious for decades so call normal people have been calling group of people that question the government on certain issues conspiracy theorist who have information and information to back up they claims. as crack pots. Once you have one bit of information that shows the truth, doesn’t that then turn theory into possibility which closer to fact and away from theory.

Too many people are trying to keep they bubble world and not wanting to question representation of the true government, as the true government is the people. Who said people in Parliament and the White House are gods? and the same goes for the media. No being on this planet is god in the sense of being above anyone, it is illusion of one perception who is better than another human being.

So as presidents, prime ministers, so call Bilderberg group name after the place where they first met, Monsanto, FDA, WHO and others are no more than people in buildings with monopoly money (a tool). Then the main point is this, if people suspect or have probable cause and find information to bring to light no matter who it is, why not let the information come the forefront instead of hiding like the representational government of the people is doing. If the claims of the truth movement and all that has gone on is not true? Then why not step forward and prove it is a fraud. Unless the truth movement is right with the information they have got and the families of 9/11 through buildingwhat.org are also calling for justice.

I am not a 9/11 truther but more than anything, people in order to make up they own conclusion no matter how upsetting it is needs to be shared, instead of hiding the information like with CCTV footage. When you hide something, in my books and many other people I have met and emailed think the same as what I am about to type. When you hide something normally you are lying to the being in front you when there information that contradicts, then you must show what you hiding to clear you conscience. Unless people love laying with lies and deceptions.

I am not one of those, all I want is the truth from any side of the argument and not to be played like a fool.

And any comments that I find are stupid I will not reply. Thank you.

Surely Stonehenge is a modern hoax designed to keep archaeologists in jobs, mostly making glossy documentaries for BBC/History Channel scratching their beards and going “Hmm, ritual and religion…”

PS I have an A level in archaeology and my wife a degree in it. I am concerned about how little evidence is needed to create a “theory” in archaeology. These tentative ideas are hypotheses at best and sometimes merely semi-coherent narratives.

It seems fairly obvious to me that Stonehenge is – in fact – the remains of the ground floor of a stone-age multi-storey car park.

I believe that careful measurement of the gaps between the stones will reveal that they are just slightly too small to easily park a car in, which will, of course, prove my theory correct.

This reminds me of the archaeologists who have spent millions of dollars to prove their THEORY of how the pyramids were built. Each time I read or saw someone proving their theory COULD be how they were built, I asked myself,”How much did it cost to prove that they COULD have been built that way?

Then we finally find out they aren’t rocks. Instead they are concrete poured into molds. All that money spent for nothing. I wonder how much of it was my tax money? How much more money is going to be spent to PROVE another THEORY on this or other subjects that it COULD be a certain thing.

Surely Stonehenge is a modern hoax designed to keep archaeologists in jobs, mostly making glossy documentaries for BBC/History Channel scratching their beards and going “Hmm, ritual and religion…”

PS I have an A level in archaeology and my wife a degree in it. I am concerned about how little evidence is needed to create a “theory” in archaeology. These tentative ideas are hypotheses at best and sometimes merely semi-coherent narratives.

It seems fairly obvious to me that Stonehenge is – in fact – the remains of the ground floor of a stone-age multi-storey car park.

I believe that careful measurement of the gaps between the stones will reveal that they are just slightly too small to easily park a car in, which will, of course, prove my theory correct.

This reminds me of the archaeologists who have spent millions of dollars to prove their THEORY of how the pyramids were built. Each time I read or saw someone proving their theory COULD be how they were built, I asked myself,”How much did it cost to prove that they COULD have been built that way?

Then we finally find out they aren’t rocks. Instead they are concrete poured into molds. All that money spent for nothing. I wonder how much of it was my tax money? How much more money is going to be spent to PROVE another THEORY on this or other subjects that it COULD be a certain thing.

Such is the nature of reality, that anyone can experience that which is least understood….

In 1558., Nostradamus, writing to King Henry,
mentions the Chaldean Alphabet, (numerology).

This system produced extraordinary results, which
were verified by senior researchers at Princeton
University, as an ultimate example of number symbolism,
i.e., synchronicity….
Article: http://www.webspawner.com/users/cosmic/

Also, this quatrain appears to be connected to
the events described above.

Century 5 #53

“The law of the Sun, (a star) contending with Venus,
(the feminine) appropriates the spirit of prophecy.
*Neither the one nor the other will be understood.
The Law of the great Messiah will hold through a
Star, (sun)….

The star Kochab has a long history in mythology,
with references dating to 2467 b.c.e. It, and
a companion star are known as the Guardians
of the Pole.

For many years, Dr. Carl Jung, and the Nobel laureate
physicist, Professor W. Pauli, discussed the nature
of reality. Their final conclusions relate to the
nature of “acausal events” i.e., that which acts as
a balance to cause and effect. They indicated that
number appears to be a tangible connection
between the spheres of matter and psyche. And
that it is here that the most fruitful field of further
investigation might be found.

“man has need of the word, but in essence number
is sacred” ….Jung
“our primary mathematical intuitions can be
arranged before we become conscious of them” Pauli

Other details in google search, “numomathematics”

Being a bit of a student in regard to Nostradamus, I notice you have chosen perhaps what may be described as two fundamentalists trying to make sense of something that is clearly above their capabilities.
Note for an expert you have to have convincing arguments to prove your case,
1) A good translation of really what is written.
2) A good interpretation of the said translation.
3) the Context of said subject.
The 3 criteria above are NOT included in said commentators output.
For a logic bypass try this from Baines:

http://www.nostradamususa.com/html/quatrain_10-72.html

The tragic events of 9-11 were truly foreshadowed here. Presently, we use the Gregorian calendar. But during Nostradamus’ lifetime they used the Julian Calendar. The seventh month on the Julian Calendar is September. {reference?}
The date 1999 provides a time clue of an event around the millennial change. However, the real clue is that the date 1999 is nothing more than a numeric anagram. If we reverse the order of the “1”s and “9”s, we arrive at the date 9-11-1 (the date of the 9-11 attacks).

Funny really a debt payer king coming from the skies in 1999 is represented as terror from the skies in NY in 2001?
Love that Rapture idea as well, LOL

This book is piece of sh..t, i looked into the sample chapter, it’s no different than journalist sh..it tv news, full of scary stories, predictions. Simply because “fear” sells better Rathford chose an easy way to get rich. DO NOT BUY IT!
Nostradamus was a simple scholar, though very smart, he understood human nature very well and used “fear” to get what he wants. He knew that people who are scared reject rational thinking and are more likely to believe in what such people like Nostradamus would tell them. What is significant it refers to people from any background – poor, rich and educated!

As strange as this is going to sound it shouldn’t surprise anyone. This book appears to be a new recruitment ploy for the greedy corporate cult of $cientology. The Co$ now appears to be predicting the new of the world via a supposed link between Nostradamus and L Ron Hubbard predictions. It’s beyond loony.

Strange I know, but they’re getting very desperate these days. I came to this page by doing a little Google research after I read this blog: http://anonymous-is-a-hategroup.blogspot.com/2009/07/what-anonymous-doesnt-want-you-to-know.htm

and watched this video mentioning Dr. Michael Rathford.
•Youtube link: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-tf55IgxHZk
•That video is hosted at a $cientology propaganda channel.

The so called “doctor” Michael Rathford has already been thoroughly debunked on the Internet and I don’t even think Anonymous has heard about this yet. I just learned about of this new scheme tonight. The Co$ is waging an information war on the Internet that a lot of people are not aware of. They’re outstretching their tentacles and in every direction, and setting their snares in order snag any unsuspecting person. These shenanigans APPEAR to be part of an information war. That’s what I suspect so far based on what I’ve seen.

I research a little further and this is what I’ve found. The book is sold at nostradamusonline.com and is published by Truth Revealed Publishing. The whois look- up information on nostradamusonline.com is secured so it doesn’t list the info on who owns/runs that website, and I can’t find anymore information. Truth Revealed Publishing is also an anonymous company with no physical address, or real owners listed. What are they hiding?

This whole thing still looks like a setup to me. I suspect that the publishing company, and their website is another Co$ front. Maybe someone else can find some information on who pseudonym “Dr. Michael Rathford”, and these people really are.

The first time I read The Nostradamus Code : World War III early this year, I thought it was sh*t! I never opened it till 2 months ago trying to understand why an 8 pointer earthquake in the South Pacific, a few kilometers north of Vanuatu, did not trigger a tsunami after the pacific region was warned. Maybe it is a testing of ETW? I came across a ”Spaceshuttle accident releases micro organisms into atmosphere…” What are the chances that some scientists left Earth last month to study micro organisms in space? I just find a few predictions are unfolding slowly one at a time. As for ”papal assasination in late Spring”, and the ”Middle Eastern Anti Christ”, I wouldn’t entirely write off Michael Rathfords book right now. Its worth keeping if you have other sources/books and the bible to compare, research and keep record. You just never know what you learn or find.

Just preferred to say that you’ll have some helpful articles in your website. You’ve achieved a unbelievably great employment with this one. Thanks!

Such is the nature of reality, that anyone can experience that which is least understood….

In 1558., Nostradamus, writing to King Henry,
mentions the Chaldean Alphabet, (numerology).

This system produced extraordinary results, which
were verified by senior researchers at Princeton
University, as an ultimate example of number symbolism,
i.e., synchronicity….
Article: http://www.webspawner.com/users/cosmic/

Also, this quatrain appears to be connected to
the events described above.

Century 5 #53

“The law of the Sun, (a star) contending with Venus,
(the feminine) appropriates the spirit of prophecy.
*Neither the one nor the other will be understood.
The Law of the great Messiah will hold through a
Star, (sun)….

The star Kochab has a long history in mythology,
with references dating to 2467 b.c.e. It, and
a companion star are known as the Guardians
of the Pole.

For many years, Dr. Carl Jung, and the Nobel laureate
physicist, Professor W. Pauli, discussed the nature
of reality. Their final conclusions relate to the
nature of “acausal events” i.e., that which acts as
a balance to cause and effect. They indicated that
number appears to be a tangible connection
between the spheres of matter and psyche. And
that it is here that the most fruitful field of further
investigation might be found.

“man has need of the word, but in essence number
is sacred” ….Jung
“our primary mathematical intuitions can be
arranged before we become conscious of them” Pauli

Other details in google search, “numomathematics”

Being a bit of a student in regard to Nostradamus, I notice you have chosen perhaps what may be described as two fundamentalists trying to make sense of something that is clearly above their capabilities.
Note for an expert you have to have convincing arguments to prove your case,
1) A good translation of really what is written.
2) A good interpretation of the said translation.
3) the Context of said subject.
The 3 criteria above are NOT included in said commentators output.
For a logic bypass try this from Baines:

http://www.nostradamususa.com/html/quatrain_10-72.html

The tragic events of 9-11 were truly foreshadowed here. Presently, we use the Gregorian calendar. But during Nostradamus’ lifetime they used the Julian Calendar. The seventh month on the Julian Calendar is September. {reference?}
The date 1999 provides a time clue of an event around the millennial change. However, the real clue is that the date 1999 is nothing more than a numeric anagram. If we reverse the order of the “1”s and “9”s, we arrive at the date 9-11-1 (the date of the 9-11 attacks).

Funny really a debt payer king coming from the skies in 1999 is represented as terror from the skies in NY in 2001?
Love that Rapture idea as well, LOL

This book is piece of sh..t, i looked into the sample chapter, it’s no different than journalist sh..it tv news, full of scary stories, predictions. Simply because “fear” sells better Rathford chose an easy way to get rich. DO NOT BUY IT!
Nostradamus was a simple scholar, though very smart, he understood human nature very well and used “fear” to get what he wants. He knew that people who are scared reject rational thinking and are more likely to believe in what such people like Nostradamus would tell them. What is significant it refers to people from any background – poor, rich and educated!

As strange as this is going to sound it shouldn’t surprise anyone. This book appears to be a new recruitment ploy for the greedy corporate cult of $cientology. The Co$ now appears to be predicting the new of the world via a supposed link between Nostradamus and L Ron Hubbard predictions. It’s beyond loony.

Strange I know, but they’re getting very desperate these days. I came to this page by doing a little Google research after I read this blog: http://anonymous-is-a-hategroup.blogspot.com/2009/07/what-anonymous-doesnt-want-you-to-know.htm

and watched this video mentioning Dr. Michael Rathford.
•Youtube link: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-tf55IgxHZk
•That video is hosted at a $cientology propaganda channel.

The so called “doctor” Michael Rathford has already been thoroughly debunked on the Internet and I don’t even think Anonymous has heard about this yet. I just learned about of this new scheme tonight. The Co$ is waging an information war on the Internet that a lot of people are not aware of. They’re outstretching their tentacles and in every direction, and setting their snares in order snag any unsuspecting person. These shenanigans APPEAR to be part of an information war. That’s what I suspect so far based on what I’ve seen.

I research a little further and this is what I’ve found. The book is sold at nostradamusonline.com and is published by Truth Revealed Publishing. The whois look- up information on nostradamusonline.com is secured so it doesn’t list the info on who owns/runs that website, and I can’t find anymore information. Truth Revealed Publishing is also an anonymous company with no physical address, or real owners listed. What are they hiding?

This whole thing still looks like a setup to me. I suspect that the publishing company, and their website is another Co$ front. Maybe someone else can find some information on who pseudonym “Dr. Michael Rathford”, and these people really are.

The first time I read The Nostradamus Code : World War III early this year, I thought it was sh*t! I never opened it till 2 months ago trying to understand why an 8 pointer earthquake in the South Pacific, a few kilometers north of Vanuatu, did not trigger a tsunami after the pacific region was warned. Maybe it is a testing of ETW? I came across a ”Spaceshuttle accident releases micro organisms into atmosphere…” What are the chances that some scientists left Earth last month to study micro organisms in space? I just find a few predictions are unfolding slowly one at a time. As for ”papal assasination in late Spring”, and the ”Middle Eastern Anti Christ”, I wouldn’t entirely write off Michael Rathfords book right now. Its worth keeping if you have other sources/books and the bible to compare, research and keep record. You just never know what you learn or find.

Just preferred to say that you’ll have some helpful articles in your website. You’ve achieved a unbelievably great employment with this one. Thanks!

We could do with a History Red Card site in Australia! Our history is constantly being reinvented. No prizes for guessing which culture and sex are the bad guys.

how many red cards do you have? the whole global warming myth is in desperate need of them.

We could do with a History Red Card site in Australia! Our history is constantly being reinvented. No prizes for guessing which culture and sex are the bad guys.

how many red cards do you have? the whole global warming myth is in desperate need of them.

“Most historians, including those who trained me, would define it as the systematic efforts made by the Nazi state to eliminate racial and political undesirables within the lands held or occupied by the forces of the Third Reich and its allies.”

Great post, but I think the term Holocaust would generally be understood as applying particularly to the Nazi ‘Final Solution to the Jewish Problem’.

In her 1993 book “Denying the Holocaust,” Deborah Lipstadt briefly discusses Buchanan. She drew back from calling him an outright Holocaust denier. But she pointed out that he has been parroting elements of the denier narrative since at least the late nineteen-eighties.

@ Steve

Thanks for the kind words. I always try to avoid being too specific when I use the term ‘Holocaust’, because I’ve found that it can raise some terribly raw emotions in people, especially Poles, Roma and other Eastern Europeans whose families suffered in much the same way as the Jews of the same region.

The way I see it (and it is only my view) we ought to try to be ambiguous about the Nazi atrocities, because while the Jews constituted an extremely large number of victims, their suffering was part of a larger atrocity which Hitler’s regime inflicted upon Europe. When we reflect on it, be we Jews, Christians or whatever, it should be as a shared experience, rather than something that happened predominantly to one group or another.

@ Eric

I don’t know where Buchanan’s head is at. While the things he says are irrational, he’s clearly not crazy. Perhaps he is instead quite smart – perhaps his intent from the start was to write on a sensitive topic from a point of view that is guaranteed to generate attention and an emotional reaction. The book that he wrote in connection with his article no doubt sold quite well because of it.

Great article, one small point though. The assertion “Is Buchanan, a citizen of the United States of America, the land that acts as a beacon of freedom to the entire world, honestly asserting that the independence of India, Burma, Malaysia and other Commonwealth nations from British overlordship was a bad thing”?

An American could quite easily defend Colonialism, just because they went into the Colonialism game late didn’t mean that they didn’t do it at all. American Samoa, the USVI, Guam et all still remain as Colonies. Just because they paid cash for them in some cases doesn’t make them any less colonial. Furthermore America has a great many other colonies, New Mexico, California, Texas et all, they simply took them from another Colonial power. – Spain. America greedily ate up the Spanish colonies once they had encouraged the citizens of those countries to revolt. I defy you to show me the difference between American Colonial troops in Manilla or the Canal Zone and British Colonial troops in Bombay et all. The only difference betwen the two Officers messes would be the fact that the Battle Honours would have mostly different place names and the Regimental Colonel in the American mess wouldn’t be drinking Pink Gin.

Can’t blame America for that, they were merely following the Standard Opperating Procedures of the time. Oh and freedom for Burma a bad thing – err, it hasn’t done the poor citizens of Myanmar any favors. When you’re arguing against the evils of Colonialism its best to keep quiet about Burma, Zimbabwe, Uganda etc.

Nevertheless a great article.

Pat Buchanan disturbs me. I’m an avid consumer of MSNBC, and he frequently appears on shows on that station as the “conservative analyst”. He’s obviously very bright, and has a JARRING combination of extremely insightful moments and outlandishly absurd and hateful rhetoric.

I think Buchanan is an example of how the extreme right and the left (to use conventional terminology) come full circle.

Often, ol’ Pat sounds more like Noam Chomsky than, say, William F. Buckley.

btw, I don’t think Buchanan is `conservative’ anything; he’s a fascist in the original sense – that of a Mussolini or a Franco (as opposed to Hitler). That is, he wouldn’t go for anything so bad as kiling off all the Jews; but if *somebody else* decided that was ok – well, meh.

Pat Buchanan is one of the worst pushers of counterknowledge out there because he is obviously a prolific author and a mainstream pundit on MSNBC, and people respect him. Flirting with revisionism? No, he’s getting down and dirty with revisionism.

Buchanan “blithely overlooks the right of non-Europeans to live independently of European Imperial overlordship” – I won’t defend Buchanan’s other views, which are evil, but there’s no right of non-Europeans to live independently of European rule. I am a white Texan who is about to get “ruled” by an African and his Democratic Party, for whom my state did not vote. Do I have a “right to live independently” of non-Texan rule? Given what an ass my governor is, must I *want* that right?

Non-Europeans, like Europeans, have instead the right to life, liberty, and property. Who does the actual governing is immaterial. Good luck retaining any life, liberty, and property under SLORC or Mugabe.

@ Chris

I would never attempt to downplay any proven historical wrongdoing by any western power – that certainly wasn’t my goal in this piece.

Rather, what I was referring to was the role the United States has played in forcing the old powers of Europe to de-colonialise, and the assistance they have provided (through recognition and trade) to the native peoples of those regions in their effort to build new, self-sustaining societies. This is quite clearly seen in India and Malaysia, but less clearly so in Indochina.

Buchanan had no place in sweeping that aside and suggesting, in a truly bigoted fashion, that the locals were better off being ruled from Westminister and Paris.

@ Greg

I think I even saw him on Fox fairly recently. Which I couldn’t fathom at all. Normally they have better sense.

Well, not always. They still continue to consult the fake Mossad spy Juval Aviv about Israeli, Palestinian and terrorism matters, despite the fact that I have phoned them and warned them about him being an anti-Israeli fake. Look out for my article next week, which is about him and a colleague of his, a fake DIA agent. Together, they helped to give birth to the modern “truther” movement.

@ Wayne

I think he needs to do a great deal more reading. He’s clearly exhausted the “hate Israel” collection of his local library and could benefit from a little variety.

@ Number 6

He’s a fantastic self-promoter, no doubt about it. I merely find his methods to be loathsome (I won’t say “Reptilian” again, because of my honored Lizardoid guests).

@ David

Perhaps “right” is the wrong word. Historically, there is no right to live free of oppression. However, there is a clear predicate of rebellion and revolution that makes imperial endeavors far more difficult to undertake. If enough people feel oppressed in a given region, they’ll throw out their oppressors. It’s a basic human truism.

As for Obama being an African, I don’t subscribe to the notion that he is of Kenyan birth. It strikes me as unsupported by the available evidence.

Whenever I hear Buchanan and his ilk discuss the Holocaust, I’m left with the uneasy feeling that, whatever they may think of the causes of the Holocaust, they’re not 100% sure that it wasn’t a good idea.

“If the option had been available to him, would Hitler, instead of commit genocide, simply have expelled all such “undesirables” from Germany and the areas he occupied?”

Of course. That’s why the effort to kill all the Jews was called the “final solution”. Earlier “solutions” to the Jewish ‘problem’ revolved around moving them into buffer areas between ‘greater’-Germany and its perceived enemies. But one the magnitude of the war made these other ’solutions’ impracticable, Hitler decided to ’solve’ the Jewish problem once and for all.

The way I see it (and it is only my view) we ought to try to be ambiguous about the Nazi atrocities, because while the Jews constituted an extremely large number of victims, their suffering was part of a larger atrocity which Hitler’s regime inflicted upon Europe.

Well… let’s not get too ambiguous, because it’s a favorite tactic of Holocaust deniers to claim that Jews weren’t really singled out as a group for extermination — they just “happened to die” from disease, starvation, or stray bullets, as many other Europeans did during the war.

Wayne:

Although your characterization of Buchanan as a Fascist is spot on, your use of Franco as an exemplar in this particular case is inappropriate. Franco went out of his way to save Jews during the war.

*Franco went out of his way to save Jews during the war.*

Right, true enough. Even so, I don’t think Buchanan would give a darn if (in the contemporary context) Iran were to destroy Israel with a nuclear bomb. No, he wouldn’t press the button, never ever, but if someone else…

This sort of thing isn’t new, the former Thatcher cabinet minister Alan Clark was coming out with similar stuff a decade or so ago – if we’d left the Nazis to it then Britain and France would have been left alone with our empires intact and so our choosing to fight him was a mistake. As for the holocaust, Clark seemed to brush it aside with relativist arguments about our alliance with Stalin. Disgraceful stuff, of course, but not uncommon amongst the British rightwing at the time; there’s a popular idea that many of the British right were “pro-fascist” and a few of them certainly were but for the most of them the problem was that they didn’t see it as their fight or their problem.

As for Buchanan, he’s no fascist, more a paleoconservative. Fascists actually like military adventure and conquest, it’s one of the cornerstones of their ideology. Paleoconservatives, conversely, are very much the “stay-at-home and only fight to defend your own borders” types.

“British conservative right”, I meant. Obviously the fascist right were pro-fascist.